Foul without contact?

[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

[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.

[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.

[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.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by 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.

Every player has their own uniform/equipment. The ball belongs to everyone. But nice try though.

[VaTerp]

I had a play earlier this year, which I believe I posted in a similar thread:

A2 goes up for a rebound with B2 in front of him. A2 lands and then proceeds to extend the ball with both hands and create enough contact to displace B2 and knock him to the floor.

I called a TC foul and signaled a push though what I was really calling was a PC. Nobody in the gym said a word and many probably assumed I was calling the "over the back" foul that we all know and love.

I felt I needed to get something here and I would make the call again. A2 gained an advantage not intended by the rules when he created contact that displaced B2 and moved him off of his entitled spot on the floor. I didnt view it as intentional or flagrant but as illegal. Obviously many here think this is not supported by rule but I've been down that road before and feel comfortable with the call and, as I stated, would make it again in a similar situation.

As for the play in the OP I'm having a hard time imagining a situation where the offensive player lands and ONLY makes contact with the ball and that contact being enough to displace the defender facing them and make them fall to the floor. But if it happens as I'm reading it I'm likely no-calling it as the defender would seem to have ample opportunity to make a play on the ball.

ETA- Just to clarify on the play where I had a whistle A2 extended the ball and shoved B2 in the back.

[Adam]

A1 driving the lane, collects the ball and jumps off of one foot for a jump stop. B1 has been in position since Friday, and uses his hands to protect his future children from the imminent collision. A1 sees he's about to commit a foul, so uses the ball to push B1 out of the way as A1 lands where B1 was previously standing.

I'm calling this a PC, as I'm certain this isn't a nit the local powers want picked.

[VaTerp]

Originally Posted by Adam

A1 driving the lane, collects the ball and jumps off of one foot for a jump stop. B1 has been in position since Friday, and uses his hands to protect his future children from the imminent collision. A1 sees he's about to commit a foul, so uses the ball to push B1 out of the way as A1 lands where B1 was previously standing.

I'm calling this a PC, as I'm certain this isn't a nit the local powers want picked.

I guess it's not as hard to imagine as I stated in my post above.

I'm calling this a PC too and not thinking twice about it.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Adam

A1 driving the lane, collects the ball and jumps off of one foot for a jump stop. B1 has been in position since Friday, and uses his hands to protect his future children from the imminent collision. A1 sees he's about to commit a foul, so uses the ball to push B1 out of the way as A1 lands where B1 was previously standing.

I'm calling this a PC, as I'm certain this isn't a nit the local powers want picked.

Exactly my position. But your explanation was better.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Every player has their own uniform/equipment. The ball belongs to everyone.

[BillyMac]

Note: This discussion does have some merit. It's the difference between no free throws for a player control foul, or two free throws taken by the best free throw shooter on the team for a technical foul.

[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.

[OKREF]

I am pretty sure the defination of a Technical Foul includes the phrase..A non contact foul by a player, and also an intentional or flagrant contact foul while the ball is dead except a foul by an airborne shooter. So since the situation with the offensive player pushing off with the ball isn't a dead ball foul, or a non contact foul, my inclination would to go with a PC foul, or possibly an intentional foul. In my opinion you can't really pass on this. This could fall under the non basketball play and you could get away with the Intentional, but I would probably go with PC.