Foul without contact?

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Jay R

How can you no call that? Are you that much rulebook lawyer?

1. I don't make up my own rules to suit my personal feelings on plays. You seem to think that makes one a poor official. That's sad since the NFHS has clearly and directly instructed officials to enforce the rules as written and refrain from imposing their personal opinions.
2. If you can't stand ot having a whistle on this action, then you can assess a technical foul and have rules book support. Just be ready for someone to call you a rules lawyer.
3. Consider this play which happens with enough frequency that most of us have encountered it.
A defensive player grabs a ball being held by an offensive player in an attempt to create a heldball. Quickly the offensive (or defensive) player pulls the ball away and the force used causes the opposing player to fall to the floor. There is no player-to-player contact only each player touching the ball. Do you call a foul on this action?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

3. Consider this play which happens with enough frequency that most of us have encountered it.
A defensive player grabs a ball being held by an offensive player in an attempt to create a heldball. Quickly the offensive (or defensive) player pulls the ball away and the force used causes the opposing player to fall to the floor. There is no player-to-player contact only each player touching the ball. Do you call a foul on this action?

Different plays entirely. In this play, the defender is going for the ball. In the debated play, the offensive player is using the ball instead of a hand or arm to displace an opponent. Essentially, using a loophole in the rules to create an advantage. One could argue that this is an advantage not intended by the rules.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Adam

Different plays entirely. In this play, the defender is going for the ball. In the debated play, the offensive player is using the ball instead of a hand or arm to displace an opponent. Essentially, using a loophole in the rules to create an advantage. One could argue that this is an advantage not intended by the rules.

Or one could argue that the defender should grab the ball.

[cmb]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

3. Consider this play which happens with enough frequency that most of us have encountered it.
A defensive player grabs a ball being held by an offensive player in an attempt to create a heldball. Quickly the offensive (or defensive) player pulls the ball away and the force used causes the opposing player to fall to the floor. There is no player-to-player contact only each player touching the ball. Do you call a foul on this action?

No. Jump ball or no call, depending how long the ball was tied up.

But that made me think of this play: how many times have we seen someone block a shot attempt with so much force on the ball that it sends the offensive player to the floor? And do we call foul there? I don't, but somehow I see these plays as different than the ones discussed earlier in this thread.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by cmb

No. Jump ball or no call, depending how long the ball was tied up.

But that made me think of this play: how many times have we seen someone block a shot attempt with so much force on the ball that it sends the offensive player to the floor? And do we call foul there? I don't, but somehow I see these plays as different than the ones discussed earlier in this thread.

Good example. What is different and is making people uncomfortable is the element of intent. If using the ball for a deliberate push strikes the official as an unfair act, then the proper penalty is an unsporting technical foul. Take a look at the definition-basically word for word! I'm not against an official making that call. I'm only against an official making a call that is wrong by rule and charging a personal foul in this case.

ART. 14 . . . An unsporting foul is a noncontact technical foul which consists of unfair, unethical, dishonorable conduct or any behavior not in accordance with the spirit of fair play.

[deecee]

Originally Posted by cmb

But that made me think of this play: how many times have we seen someone block a shot attempt with so much force on the ball that it sends the offensive player to the floor? And do we call foul there? I don't, but somehow I see these plays as different than the ones discussed earlier in this thread.

Very different than the play being discussed. This is just the result of a normal basketball activity. Shot, block and incidental contact after the shot. The intention wasn't to knock the player to the ground but prevent the shot.

Holding the ball and using it to push a defender is no different in my book than using and arm or hand to clear space. The ball is just an extension of the body, and it was used to gain an advantage.

Calling a T here is overkill and not calling anything is wrong IMO.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by deecee

Very different than the play being discussed. This is just the result of a normal basketball activity. Shot, block and incidental contact after the shot. The intention wasn't to knock the player to the ground but prevent the shot.

Holding the ball and using it to push a defender is no different in my book than using and arm or hand to clear space. The ball is just an extension of the body, and it was used to gain an advantage.

Calling a T here is overkill and not calling anything is wrong IMO.

If the defender is facing the offensive player and the offensive player is using the ball then the defender has every opportunity to put his hands on the ball so I'm not calling anything unless the push is to the face area, which would be an unsporting T.

If the defender's back is turned and the offensive player uses the ball to INTENTIONALLY knock the player down or out the way then I would consider an unsporting T.

In neither situation is a personal foul a consideration for me.

[Jay R]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

If the defender is facing the offensive player and the offensive player is using the ball then the defender has every opportunity to put his hands on the ball so I'm not calling anything unless the push is to the face area, which would be an unsporting T.

If the defender's back is turned and the offensive player uses the ball to INTENTIONALLY knock the player down or out the way then I would consider an unsporting T.

In neither situation is a personal foul a consideration for me.

Imagine a player using his off hand to push the defender back to create space and then be able to shoot. We would all call a player control foul , correct?

Imagine the same amount of contact and space created but the contact is created by the dribbler using the ball instead of his hand. Are you making a call? That exact play happened to me last year.

[APG]

Y'all take this for what it's worth, but I believe the NBA doesn't take such a literal reading of the rule and would rule this an offensive foul rather than a technical foul.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Jay R

Imagine a player using his off hand to push the defender back to create space and then be able to shoot. We would all call a player control foul , correct?

Imagine the same amount of contact and space created but the contact is created by the dribbler using the ball instead of his hand. Are you making a call? That exact play happened to me last year.

Nope, I'm not making that call.

[hoopguy]

This is ridiculous that referees would even consider a foul for an offensive player sticking the ball out and the defender not being able to do anything about it. In basketball terms that is called 'a good move'.

If I was playing and an offensive player, while holding the ball pushed me with the ball, would I expect a foul???? Of course not. I would attempt to grab or steal the ball away. If I could not do this then the offensive player beat me with his move. I know we are talking NFHS but try taking your ridiculous call to the playground and call an offensive foul. Good luck. Wearing stripes should not cause a loss of common sense.

The name of this thread says it all. Common foul without contact. My rules interpreter has stressed over and over that this is not possible. Generally, the foul in question has to do with a moving pick. No matter how much the person moves while setting the pick, if there is no contact, then no foul. I believe this applies everywhere in our game.

[Rich]

Let me look into my crystal ball:

I see a little time away from the board quite possible for two posters if they don't calm things down and stop focusing on each other.

(For those that don't understand why I posted this, I just deleted 4 messages. One was because it focused on and quoted another deleted message.)

[deecee]

Originally Posted by Rich

Let me look into my crystal ball:

I see a little time away from the board quite possible for two posters if they don't calm things down and stop focusing on each other.

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.

[Rich]

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.

You don't need to apologize. You simply need to resist the urge to get in a pissing match. I deleted another post of yours in another thread.

Life would be much easier here if a poster didn't focus on you and you didn't respond right back when he does. Like basketball, it's possible I'll only get the second foul committed...but probably not.

Anyhow, this is my last comment on this. Next time, I head to the garage where I keep the banhammer.

[deecee]

Fair enough.