Foul without contact?

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by deecee

Rich, in all honesty I don't start, nor say anything without someone else comment first. If you can show where I started anything I'll gladly apologize.

Isn't it usually the 2nd shove in a scrum that gets the T, or the 15 yards in football?

[johnny d]

As a person who has had many posts edited or removed, I think you guys go way overboard and remove too much stuff.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

This is an enormous stretch. To allow you to see that, I invite you to consider exactly the same play without a ball in his hands. He extends his arms, and the defender flinches, or dodges those arms. You calling a foul?

Nobody flinched or dodged anything here. There was contact, it just so happens it was with the ball. Picture it this way. Defender is there all day, stationary, waiting. Dribbler approaches and goes airborne. You are straightlined, directly behind the defender. There is contact and the defender lands flat on his back. You can't see what made the actual contact, an outstretched arm or the ball held in both hands.

I don't see where it makes any difference.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Nobody flinched or dodged anything here. There was contact, it just so happens it was with the ball. Picture it this way. Defender is there all day, stationary, waiting. Dribbler approaches and goes airborne. You are straightlined, directly behind the defender. There is contact and the defender lands flat on his back. You can't see what made the actual contact, an outstretched arm or the ball held in both hands.

I don't see where it makes any difference.

I cannot speak for anyone else, but I am not calling fouls I do not see. If I am straight-lined that is even worse to call something I do not see. Players also flop or exaggerate any contact. Saw this several times this year alone.

Peace

[Rich]

Originally Posted by johnny d

As a person who has had many posts edited or removed, I think you guys go way overboard and remove too much stuff.

Thank you for being a fan of the Official Forum.

Sincerely,
Rich

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I cannot speak for anyone else, but I am not calling fouls I do not see. If I am straight-lined that is even worse to call something I do not see. Players also flop or exaggerate any contact. Saw this several times this year alone.

Peace

So you're directly behind the defender and you see the offensive player knock him to the floor and land on top, but you make no call because the contact may have been with the ball.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Nobody flinched or dodged anything here. There was contact, it just so happens it was with the ball. Picture it this way. Defender is there all day, stationary, waiting. Dribbler approaches and goes airborne. You are straightlined, directly behind the defender. There is contact and the defender lands flat on his back. You can't see what made the actual contact, an outstretched arm or the ball held in both hands.

I don't see where it makes any difference.

Well... there's the rules for one...

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Rich

Thank you for being a fan of the Official Forum.

Sincerely,
Rich

Classic.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I cannot speak for anyone else, but I am not calling fouls I do not see. If I am straight-lined that is even worse to call something I do not see. Players also flop or exaggerate any contact. Saw this several times this year alone.

Peace

I'm not that good. Sometimes I have to put an educated guess on a play. Especially when I'm working 2-man.

There are times when a player goes to the floor and I'm 95% sure that he was tripped or someone stepped on his heel but I couldn't swear under oath that I *saw* foot touch heel. Hasn't stopped me from putting a whistle on it and I haven't been wrong yet when I have.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

Well... there's the rules for one...

Hypothetical. For argument sake. A defensive player reaches out and tries to steal the ball from a ball handler but only ends up contacting the ball handler's arm, creating a disadvantage. Foul? Right? Same play and the contact is a big push from behind, creating a disadvantage, but the contact isn't with any "personal" skin on the ball handler, but on his jersey. No "personal" skin to skin contact? No foul? Right? What difference does it make what comes between Brooke Shields and her jeans, or between two players? A jersey? A basketball? Or nothing (skin to skin contact)? Does it, or doesn't it, matter? Does it, or doesn't it, make a difference?

Now let me get my popcorn out of the microwave, so that I can sit back and continue to enjoy this "basketball contact: personal foul, or technical foul" thread, for about the tenth time over the past decade. Maybe we should have a poll? How else will we ever come up with a solid answer without getting any help from the NFHS?

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Hypothetical. For argument sake. A defensive player reaches out and tries to steal the ball from a ball handler but only ends up contacting the ball handler's arm, creating a disadvantage. Foul? Right? Same play and the contact is a big push from behind, creating a disadvantage, but the contact isn't with any "personal" skin on the ball handler, but on his jersey. No "personal" skin to skin contact? No foul? Right? What difference does it make what comes between Brooke Shields and her jeans, or between two players, a jersey, a basketball, or nothing (skin to skin contact)? Does it, or doesn't it, matter, or make a difference?

Seriously Billy? The jersey pushes an opponent?

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Seriously Billy? The jersey pushes an opponent?

Too quick. My popcorn wasn't ready.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Rich

I'm not that good. Sometimes I have to put an educated guess on a play. Especially when I'm working 2-man.

There are times when a player goes to the floor and I'm 95% sure that he was tripped or someone stepped on his heel but I couldn't swear under oath that I *saw* foot touch heel. Hasn't stopped me from putting a whistle on it and I haven't been wrong yet when I have.

I rarely work 2 man, so this is not much of an issue for me in "real" games. And even when I have worked 2 man, I do everything to get in position. But the situation that JAR describes sounds rather unlikely. I have also seen enough of games where a player acts more like they were contacted and did not get contacted at all. So from the educated guess part, I tend to not "guess" if I did not see anything that looks like contact. If that makes me a bad official then I will just be a bad official. But I like to call what I see, not what I completely guess on. Or I need to move to improve my angles. I do it often, it is not terribly hard and when it becomes very hard I will quit. And I am not saying I am always in the great position, just stating that I do not want to guess. I am like many that kick myself for missing things or not seeing the entire play, but I can tell you when I see myself on tape that is not very common.

Peace

[Jay R]

Subsequent to Billy Mac's post. Someone grabs a jersey to hold an opponent. Can't call that a personal foul. No contact with the body.

[just another ref]

I'm not talking about guessing as far as the contact. I'm saying if there is contact and the defender is stationary but you cannot see if the contact was with a hand or the ball in the hand it doesn't matter. The call is the same.