Foul without contact?

[parrot]

Just a layman with a question here;

In a state game this weekend, a girl from my daughter's team was guarding a ball handler from the other team. The girl drives and tries to jump stop, gathering the ball in front of her while in the air, then rams into our girl with the ball as she lands. It looked clearly to be player control to me, but was called a block. That's neither here nor there really though. My question concerns the fact that the ball acted as a buffer between the two players and there didn't appear to be any actual physical contact between the two players involved in the play;

SECTION 7 BLOCKING, CHARGING

ART. 1 . . . Blocking is illegal personal contact which impedes the progress of
an opponent with or without the ball.

I know it's a bit of a technicality, and you certainly can't have players running around using the ball as a weapon, but I'm just curious what the general view is on this. Do you have a foul if there is no player to player contact?

[just another ref]

This, like most plays, has been debated here before. Some say that since there is no direct contact, if a foul is called it must be a technical. I look at the ball as an extension of the hand so a PC is a possibility. I don't see any way you could call a foul on the defender if the only contact is with the ball.

[Adam]

I agree with just another ref. I'll add that it's possible the official saw something you didn't (contact). Or, he just missed it and thought he saw something you didn't.

[HokiePaul]

then rams into our girl with the ball as she lands.

Just to clarify, are you saying that the ball and only the ball made contact with the defender?


If the offensive player intentionally "used the ball as a weapon" to clear out an opponent, I'd probably have an intentional foul on the offense.

But if it was not intentional and happened (as you said) unintentionally with the player trying to gather the ball and land, I'm calling it like I would a normal block/charge play ... I'm looking at whether or not the defender have legal guarding position and going from there.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Adam

I agree with just another ref. I'll add that it's possible the official saw something you didn't (contact). Or, he just missed it and thought he saw something you didn't.

Always listen to Adam. I am qualified to comment here, having just returned from Mexico.


Either way, a Dos Equis couldn't hurt.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by parrot

Just a layman with a question here;

In a state game this weekend, a girl from my daughter's team was guarding a ball handler from the other team. The girl drives and tries to jump stop, gathering the ball in front of her while in the air, then rams into our girl with the ball as she lands. It looked clearly to be player control to me, but was called a block. That's neither here nor there really though. My question concerns the fact that the ball acted as a buffer between the two players and there didn't appear to be any actual physical contact between the two players involved in the play;

SECTION 7 BLOCKING, CHARGING

ART. 1 . . . Blocking is illegal personal contact which impedes the progress of
an opponent with or without the ball.

I know it's a bit of a technicality, and you certainly can't have players running around using the ball as a weapon, but I'm just curious what the general view is on this. Do you have a foul if there is no player to player contact?

IF (and I wasn't there) the defender didn't give the offensive player a spot to land (and wasn't in the spot before the offensive player left the floor), and if the contact caused a disadvantage, then I'm likely to see the contact as occurring on the body and get a blocking foul, even if others see the contact as only with the ball.

[parrot]

Originally Posted by Adam

I agree with just another ref. I'll add that it's possible the official saw something you didn't (contact). Or, he just missed it and thought he saw something you didn't.

This is true. I was wondering about how the play should be ruled, as I saw it, that the contact was only with the ball.

And to be clear, I never meant to suggest there was anything intentional about it. When I say she "rams" our player, it was just her momentum carrying her into her, - though it was a pretty aggressive move and I felt like she completely initiated the contact.

Thanks for the info guys.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by parrot

This is true. I was wondering about how the play should be ruled, as I saw it, that the contact was only with the ball.

And to be clear, I never meant to suggest there was anything intentional about it. When I say she "rams" our player, it was just her momentum carrying her into her, - though it was a pretty aggressive move and I felt like she completely initiated the contact.

Thanks for the info guys.

I'll add that I think bob is right. If the defender didn't have LGP and moved into the opponent's path, forcing the opponent to brace her fall with the ball, I'm calling a block.

[Hugh Refner]

If "the hand is part of the ball", is the ball part of the hand?

[parrot]

Originally Posted by Adam

I'll add that I think bob is right. If the defender didn't have LGP and moved into the opponent's path, forcing the opponent to brace her fall with the ball, I'm calling a block.

Like I said, I'm no official, but I do lurk here and try to understand the rules. In my view she was in textbook LGP and all her movements were completely legal. The ballhandler was quite a bit bigger and drove right at her trying to get to the hoop. She took maybe 2-3 steps back, then stood her ground with her arms out at her sides, at which point the ballhandler jumped right into the middle of her chest with the ball, sending her ***-over-teakettle.

IMO, this was an easy PC foul for probably 90+% of the guys here, and probably the other two guys on the floor at the time as well (the whole ball thing notwithstanding). We have this official pretty regularly. I don't recall her ever calling a PC fall unless it was absolutely beyond question. If you want that call from her, you better have been in that spot long enough to be receiving mail and have a cable hookup.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by HokiePaul

Just to clarify, are you saying that the ball and only the ball made contact with the defender?


If the offensive player intentionally "used the ball as a weapon" to clear out an opponent, I'd probably have an intentional foul on the offense.

But if it was not intentional and happened (as you said) unintentionally with the player trying to gather the ball and land, I'm calling it like I would a normal block/charge play ... I'm looking at whether or not the defender have legal guarding position and going from there.

If the dribbler didn't use the ball intentionally to clear out an opponent, then there's no way you can call a foul on the defender for contacting the ball (or being contacted by the ball) - contacting the ball is legal.

[BigT]

Originally Posted by parrot

Like I said, I'm no official, but I do lurk here and try to understand the rules. In my view she was in textbook LGP and all her movements were completely legal. The ballhandler was quite a bit bigger and drove right at her trying to get to the hoop. She took maybe 2-3 steps back, then stood her ground with her arms out at her sides, at which point the ballhandler jumped right into the middle of her chest with the ball, sending her ***-over-teakettle.

IMO, this was an easy PC foul for probably 90+% of the guys here, and probably the other two guys on the floor at the time as well (the whole ball thing notwithstanding). We have this official pretty regularly. I don't recall her ever calling a PC fall unless it was absolutely beyond question. If you want that call from her, you better have been in that spot long enough to be receiving mail and have a cable hookup.

Getting mail and cable.. that was funny...LOL

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by HokiePaul

Just to clarify, are you saying that the ball and only the ball made contact with the defender?


If the offensive player intentionally "used the ball as a weapon" to clear out an opponent, I'd probably have an intentional foul on the offense.

But if it was not intentional and happened (as you said) unintentionally with the player trying to gather the ball and land, I'm calling it like I would a normal block/charge play ... I'm looking at whether or not the defender have legal guarding position and going from there.

Count me in the camp that believes this way of thinking and officiating such action is dead wrong BY RULE.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by parrot

This is true. I was wondering about how the play should be ruled, as I saw it, that the contact was only with the ball.

And to be clear, I never meant to suggest there was anything intentional about it. When I say she "rams" our player, it was just her momentum carrying her into her, - though it was a pretty aggressive move and I felt like she completely initiated the contact.

Thanks for the info guys.

The ball cannot foul anyone! Your initial post was correct that there must be physical contact between two opposing players in order to call a personal foul.
An unsporting act of deliberately striking an opponent with the ball can only be deemed a technical foul, BY RULE.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Adam

I'll add that I think bob is right. If the defender didn't have LGP and moved into the opponent's path, forcing the opponent to brace her fall with the ball, I'm calling a block.

Please explain how you have a blocking foul when the defender didn't make any contact with the ball handler? Lah me. (I miss him.)