It's A Close Call ...
 

This is a tough one, but if that's what you see, then fine, but it's not what I see. I see the defender's right hip making contact with the shooter before the shooter returns to the floor. It is also my opinion that the defender's knee makes contact with the shooter, also before the shooter returns to the floor, but this aspect of the play is much closer, and I may be mistaken. Bottom line: Contact before the shooter returns to the floor, but I don't have any problems with anybody seeing it differently, especially in real time.

One way, or another, that takes care of the "act of shooting" foul. Even if the shooter wasn't fouled in the act of shooting, he still got fouled before the ball hit out of bounds, and became dead. Illegal (not incidental) live ball contact, is a foul, even if it's not intentional, or flagrant, and should be called.

If the offensive player got knocked down in this manner while setting a screen, or going for a rebound, or diving to save a ball about to go out of bounds, or simply cutting across the lane, a foul would be called, so why not here?

Some less experienced officials might even consider a "hard" intentional foul here, but that's for another discussion.

I am having a hard time seeing this one as a play-on. Too much contact as the defender basically lands on the shooter and knocks him to the floor. Yes it is a nice block, but that's just too much contact.

+1

You can put me down in the no call camp.

Seems to me to be a lot like a pass and crash where the pass is going to end up 3 rows into the bleachers, but as the contact doesn't have a clear and immediate impact on the play or put any one at a disadvantage then I'm passing.

Now if you are concerned about the level/ placement of contact and rough play I guess I could buy that just doesn't fall on my radar that way.

I supposed I deserved to be slapped!
 

Hey Brad,

This is Ryan, I'm the person who you so requested be slapped. I would like to apologize for wasting your time while you wait to watch the videos that I have put together for you and our officiating community. Most of these videos are not watched on the youtube page and are embedded in forums like these. Without the "time wasting" splash pages most would miss the question or the point to be made by the videos.
I hope you can forgive me. I just need to make sure all of our videos are understood and receive proper recognition for the many hours of hard work by our officials who record the games and for my many hours of hard work putting these together for the betterment of all.
I'm excited I found this site and look forward to being a positive contributing member of this forum.

Ryan

Ryan, welcome to the forum. My suggestion wouldn't be to remove the splash pages; but maybe to make them shorter (5 seconds as opposed to 10, for example.)

Welcome to the forum. While colorful, I believe what Brad was referring to is that you could shorten these considerably and still get the information across that you wish to by making use of the Description field on YouTube itself.

If that doesn't work the way you want it to, I'm sure the 10 seconds could be shortened somewhat and still accomplish what you wish to accomplish.

Hey guys,

I appreciate the feedback minus the physical abuse I would have gotten from Brad. All good ideas. I chose 10 seconds because people read at different speeds and I wanted to give everyone, including us speed readers, the opportunity to digest the words. Fortunately with youtube we can scroll the video forwards and backwards allowing us to skip over the 10 seconds, technology is awesome!
I will however take your advice and try 5 second splash pages, just for my new friends here at officiating.com!

Ryan

Ryan,

So what was the verdict from your association on this play? Should a foul be called or not?

Actually, I was the calling or non-calling official on this play. Looking back on it, I felt that I could have called a non-shooting foul for the contact following the block. The coach of the player that got hit was upset there was a no-call but we had been allowing contact like this throughout the game on both sides of the floor.
I'm positive I would have gotten boos from the home fans for a call here but the video would back me up.
Someone on the Facebook group had asked "would you foul out their best player on a play like this?" My answer would be, probably not. Would l call this type of foul early in a game? Yes I think I would.
To some, a foul is a foul is a foul. I wish officiating were that easy. I try to take into account all the variables (i.e. time, score, player foul count...) when determining what to call and when.
So there is no easy answer to this play. So the best answer I can give to "is this a foul?" would be "it depends..."

so what?

Really don't like this. jmo

[QUOTE=

Really don't like this. jmo[/QUOTE]

Ok.

So a foul early in the game may not be a foul late in the game for you?

I find it hard to believe that you'd have this philosophy -- and even if you did that you'd be so open about it.

The idea that a fifth foul should somehow have more of a threshold isn't an uncommon philosophy; especially on the best player. Personally, I think if he's the best player, he should know how to not get a foul called when he has four. The only time those here advocate for such a philosophy is if he is the only thing on the losing team keeping your game from falling apart in a major blowout.

Other than that, I don't have to worry about it. And I've had no problem telling a coach on a play like this that he was fine until he went through the shooter.

My understanding of a forum like this is for the free exchange of ideas about how we officiate. To hide my philosophies would defeat this purpose. I would hope that others in this forum would feel the same way.

Judgement is in the eye of the beholder. Rules application is a different story. An out of bounds in the first quarter is still an out of bounds in the 4th quarter. But to hold our judgement to the same standard would be too ridged. We must be allowed the ability to adjust our judgement to the situation and in a way that best suits the game.

In regards to fouls at certain times of the games - here are some of my thoughts. Hand checks, illegal screens and touch fouls should be called in the first quarter to clean up your game. However, if you have not called these fouls all game, DO NOT bring this type of call into the game in the fourth quarter, unless its intentional or flagrant. Introducing new types of fouls in the fourth quarter is too late.

When it comes to removing a player from the game on his 5th foul, this foul better be good and it better be one that was obvious. It's not fair to the players or the game to disqualify a player with a touch foul, or a foul that only you saw. You may have called that touch foul in the first quarter on this player but you better call a good one on him in the fourth to foul him out. I would be surprised if you have never had a discussion about this with your partners during a pregame or post game. If this is the first time you've heard of such a philosophy then maybe you just don't have enough experience.

Now this philosophy doesn't apply to every situation in every game. Let say you have a player (i.e. football bench player) out there who is disrupting the game and causing all kinds of havoc and hard fouls, then maybe you need to get him out the game. So reverse the philosophy and get him dq'd on a quick one, "to make the game better". This is what judgement is all about, not just from play to play but also about how to keep the game running good, clean and fair.