NFHS Offensive Foul on Rebound Question

[rekent]

These were all ball through the net and run of the mill rebounding fouls. Nothing intentional or flagrant that in my mind rises to the level of a technical.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by rekent

These were all ball through the net and run of the mill rebounding fouls. Nothing intentional or flagrant that in my mind rises to the level of a technical.

Fair enough ... but it's not your judgement as to intentional or flagrant that matters here. If the official on the court felt it was intentional or flagrant, then that was the correct call for that situation. You might disagree with him about whether he should have called it flagrant - but it appears he did so nonetheless.

[BayStateRef]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

Fair enough ... but it's not your judgement as to intentional or flagrant that matters here. If the official on the court felt it was intentional or flagrant, then that was the correct call for that situation. You might disagree with him about whether he should have called it flagrant - but it appears he did so nonetheless.

Or the official might not know the rule. He might believe that all dead ball contact is a technical foul. I have heard exactly that explanation from officials. I have also seen officials rule dead ball contact to be a common foul.

I won't begin to list the rules mistakes I have seen or been told about (by other officials) in the last few weeks.

[maven]

Originally Posted by rekent

These were all ball through the net and run of the mill rebounding fouls.

If the ball is through the net, then they cannot be rebounding fouls. You can't rebound a dead ball.

You also cannot wave off a basket for a dead-ball foul after the basket. I'm having trouble seeing 4 possible (and correct) calls for this situation — at least the 4 you mention.

[HokiePaul]

Originally Posted by maven

If the ball is through the net, then they cannot be rebounding fouls. You can't rebound a dead ball.

You also cannot wave off a basket for a dead-ball foul after the basket. I'm having trouble seeing 4 possible (and correct) calls for this situation — at least the 4 you mention.

This might be the impression from the observer that the foul occured after the ball was through the net. But that could have been when the "whistle" blew -- not when the foul occured. A late whistle in a couple of these cases could explain it. Of course it would have had to be a really late whistle to wave off the basket.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by HokiePaul

This might be the impression from the observer that the foul occured after the ball was through the net. But that could have been when the "whistle" blew -- not when the foul occured. A late whistle in a couple of these cases could explain it. Of course it would have had to be a really late whistle to wave off the basket.

Late, but on a layup it wouldn't have to be horribly late. Just badly late. Could be a situation where the push started early and cleared the lane for the layup.

Without video, it's really hard to tell.

It could be the officials just screwed up the calls.

[BLydic]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

Fair enough ... but it's not your judgement as to intentional or flagrant that matters here. If the official on the court felt it was intentional or flagrant, then that was the correct call for that situation. You might disagree with him about whether he should have called it flagrant - but it appears he did so nonetheless.

Fair enough ... but I think he was clarifying and I also don't think he's questioning the officials, merely looking to get it correct himself.

Originally Posted by rekent

These were all ball through the net and run of the mill rebounding fouls. Nothing intentional or flagrant that in my mind rises to the level of a technical.

If the ball is through the net, the ball is dead, no? Dead ball contact should be ignored unless flagrant or intentional ...