Last shot in the Indiana-Miami game

[VaTerp]

Originally Posted by rekent

That is the part that bothers me. Had the same play occurred 2 minutes earlier, I don't think there is any way they pass on it. A foul is a foul, from jump to final horn.

Disagree on all accounts.

1) I don't think this is a foul at any point in the game so to say there is "no way they pass on it" two minutes earlier is flat out wrong IMO.

2) I really wish we would stop with the "foul is a foul" nonsense. There are generally three kinds of contact. Illegal, marginal, and incidental.

The illegal and incidental are easy to call as fouls or non fouls respectively. It's the marginal contact where officials earn their stripes and have to use their judgement and discretion.

There are marginal contact plays that I may call a foul in a 40 point blowout that you wouldnt call in a close contest. There are marginal plays that you arent sure about that you may call in the first quarter but wouldn't in the last minute. That's just the way it is.

The "foul is a foul" stuff sounds good but is not how things work in the real world where officials have to make decisions and apply the rules intelligently.

[MD Longhorn]

I have no foul, at any point in the game, at any level of play.

[Rich]

No chance I'd call a foul on that. At any point of the game.

[OKREF]

Not a foul.

RSBQ was affected by the small amount of contact that occured.

[Rob1968]

OKREF

Not a foul.

RSBQ was not affected by the small amount of contact that occured.

(Fixed it for you.)

[Rich1]

Originally Posted by APG

Two hands on a shooter isn't part of the POE...that relates to a dribbler.

Well, if we're going to split hairs the, yes, a shooter is not a dribbler. And, although I see two hands on the shooter from just about the time he catches the ball until after he releases the shot, I guess the next post would just point out that since he didn't put the ball on the floor he was never a dribbler. For me the issue is all about disadvantage/sbrq. I didn't see it so I'm not calling it.

But, I think any ref worth their salt could infer from the poe that if two hands on the dribbler is a no no then two hands on a player who catches, takes a step and shoots should be ignored unless he puts the ball on the ground once.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Rich1

Well, if we're going to split hairs the, yes, a shooter is not a dribbler. And, although I see two hands on the shooter from just about the time he catches the ball until after he releases the shot,

I really must be watching a video. I can't tell if there are two hands on the shooter or not. If there are, it doesn't seem obvious enough to me like with a hand check call.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Rich1

But, I think any ref worth their salt could infer from the poe that if two hands on the dribbler is a no no then two hands on a player who catches, takes a step and shoots should be ignored unless he puts the ball on the ground once.

The POE most certainly doesn't mean 2-hand contact on the shooter should be ignored. It just may not be as automatic as it is on a dribbler but it is n't a freebie for the defense.

That said, in this case, I would still call it based on the affect...which I believe is none, thus no foul.

[Rich1]

Agreed. No foul in my view.

From the get go I have only been pointing out that if you WANT it to be a foul you could probably justify it.