What exactly is 'the path' of a shooter? Assuming that is different from the path of a dribbler.....

Or better yet, avoid any physical contact. Which, it appears, he did avoid doing.

The shooter gets to chose how they shoot the ball. The defense has to defend it legally. If the shooter wants to trap the defender in a bad position, the defender has to be smart enough to avoid it.

How did he change directions in mid-air then? Was there a big gust of wind? Or was it from the contact with the shooter?

It is whichever way he wants to go where a defender has not legally obtained a position.

Well you're going to be alone or in the minority in thinking that...definitely contact there IMO.

Sucked in his gut...curved his spine to make an inverted C.....I don't know how he did it, but the camera angles provided doesn't show any contact. Only results that lead the majority to think there must have been contact. :p

Sometimes, you don't get the camera angle you need and you have to go by the symptoms...and all the symptoms of contact were there. His path was one that would create contact. The defender's body reacted at exactly the right time as if there were contact. The shooter's body also display a reaction at the same time that was consistent with contact. All that says trust the official who has a better angle than the TV camera.

This is the trails call to make all the way. Maybe he was straightlined, maybe he had a better look than you think. Either way, the defender was not in a legal position when contact occurred with jump shooter. This has to be a foul every time.

If there was literally no contact like you're trying to say, you would see the defender have a much different reaction than what he showed.

For the record there was another play where a Michigan player (I believe Robinson) did a fake and a UL player landed on Robinson after the fake. The difference is Robinson did not continue to shoot and dribbled to where he would get contact. The only difference was this play was earlier in the game (based on the thread title) and it involved a shooter. Both players IMO were properly called a foul on the defender for committing and not being an LGP when contact occurred.

Peace

So normal offensive movement is anything the shooter chooses to do? I disagree. That logic removes the necessity of putting 'normal offensive movement' in the rule book then, because nothing is abnormal. Sorry, a shooter jumping sideways towards a defender to shoot the ball is abnormal. If anything, wouldn't common sense say that if he's going to jump sideways, he would have jumped the other way, away from the defender?

I'm looking through the books, can't find what I'm looking for, but I know somewhere I've read that the onus is on the offenvise player to avoid contact. Maybe older wording, but I think fits this specific play perfectly....

The defender showed no reaction other than stand there..... Now the UM coach and bench personnel, they had a reaction... looks kinda like a 'are you kidding me?' type reaction.

I hold myself to the following standard: Work your arse off to be in position to make calls (move to improve), BUT, never call what can't be seen (aka make shit up aka guessing/ASSuming).

If I can't tell a partner, assignor or a coach what I had - I'm not blowing my whisle.

Wait a minute, now. I didn't say there wasn't any contact.