Philosophy question (video)...
 

How many of you think this play needs a whistle?

<iframe width="853" height="480" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/lyCFMHgyUpU?rel=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

The thought ran through my mind when the foul was called. Was White put at a disadvantage?

Pass.

Game interupter. Play on!

I had to watch twice to see what was being whistled...minimal contact...no disadvantage or displacement...leave it alone. What's bad is that it reinforces "Over the Back" myth.

It was so minimal that at first viewing I thought it must be something else and I missed it. Pass.

Same here had to watch twice to see what was called. I would let this go.

Color It ...
 

... incidental contact.

In fact the contact was initiated by the White player jumping into the alleged fouler.

It looks like a typical acceptable girls basketball foul to me.

Peace

I see a slap that knocks the ball loose, but the right team keeps the ball. I might call this in a middle school game, but not a high school varsity game.

I don't see anything that needs calling.

At first, that was what I was thinking....that it was even reversed but the foul that was called was the slap that knocked the ball free.

That said, a pass is not a bad idea.

Pasadena. No possession consequence.

Pasadena +1!
 

In pre-game, I will say that we'll have a better game if we can avoid rebounding foul calls where there is no possession consequence. If it's non-basketball, or really egregious, put a whistle on it. But if the defensive team has the ball, let's roll.

Excellent call.

When I saw the contact I knew the call was going to be made, possibly because it was GV. I hoped there wouldn't have been a whistle for a couple of reasons:

*These are varsity players
*Even though the ball was knocked away from the player in White, she had three of her teammates standing right there...meaning it's not like the contact stopped a fast break.

I am not convinced the ball was illegally knocked out of the rebounder's hand. It looks like to me like players were going at the ball and it was not under control. And no one was knocked down and certainly not put at some serious disadvantage if there was some contact. The right team was going to get the rebound and this would have been a rather routine no-call IMO.

Peace

What indept analysis. :rolleyes:

Care to elaborate on your opinion?

Love the new word. And it fits.

I can't tell from the video whether it was a good call or not.

Did white have the ball and then red knocked it away? Did red's extended arm hold white down and prevent her from catching the rebound?

Did white "back out" red or did red "give way?"

Much more likely to have a no-call if white catches and controls the ball. Once it hits the floor though, then if Red hit the arm, or held the player, I think you need to get the foul (you can't wait to be sure white would pick up the ball).

There is minimal contact with the body, and the slap at the ball doesn't look like it got arm. Play on. Would your answer be different if the ball bounced to a red player who laid it in? I'm still not sure I would have a call.

Contact that causes rebounder to lose ball.....this early in the game..... Foul.

IMHO, player control fouls and rebounding fouls early in a game help to make your game easier to work.

I wouldn't call it incidental. A patient whistle if there was possession consequence would be the right scenario. She fumbles the ball and loses it, blow, as in video, no.

That extra second would have allowed him to make right call.

Not the worst call. As Jeff said, a girls game call.

passgas

Sorry, you just can't tell that one way or the other from that video. We tend to default to assuming a conclusion that opposes the call as made in the video. I'm giving the official the benefit of doubt on this one. Short of getting the arm at all, there was no foul. I don't think he made that up. So, that leaves it to the question of individual possession consequence or team possession consequence.

inept or in depth..... probably going for inept?

or maybe indebt...my current state

That's what I get for being a smart-a$$. :D

Girls game: I have no problem with them making this call. It appears there was contact on the arm that knocked the ball away from the White player. In Girls ball, those are the kinds of things that can quite often lead to more physical play on the next rebound...the defender now thinks she has to more aggressively "box out" to make sure it doesn't happen again.

Boys game: Play on.

No foul.

And if there IS a foul ... not calling this one.

Although the video quality is lacking, it looks like the player in red gets a hand on the middle to upper half of the ball making it difficult for white to secure the ball anyway. White did not have possession on the rebound, just inside position. Red is taller and is able to make a play on the ball that prevents a clean rebound.

Play on

What ??? But There Was Contact ...
 

I would if the coach asked my why I didn't call a foul on the play.

We don't use big words like that here, that's for you Eastern bred guys

The contact, which is minimal at best, while it did cause white to drop the ball(maybe), white retained possession, no other red team around and the girl n red was backing out and going the other way. Looks like I would have a pass on this one.

Is "displacement" a big word? Because, I was leaning toward 14-White for displacement, but at that angle, it's hard to tell whether red was moving with her.

In Chicago we say "I got nuttin"