Last shot in the Indiana-Miami game
 

Did anyone consider the contact on the last shot to be a foul in the game last night.

I just wanted some opinions as it appears media people think touching is a foul, so I wanted to ask actual officials.

Would you call that at any point in any game you work?

APG-Jet, embed the video if you need be. ;)

Peace

Saw a quick blurb on SC today when I got to work. Didn't have a chance to actually watch the play. I'm curious, too.

Here's the play
 

The things we do for you... :D

<iframe width="853" height="480" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/vyTkpFJ7XYE?rel=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

If you were really looking hard for a reason to blow your whistle in the last seconds and extend the game the I see a foul here. Defender placed two hands on the shooter which by POE should bea hand check / illegal use foul. But I did not see even the slightest affect that it had on the shot so I say let it go.

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.

Honestly, I don't think I have this as a foul 30 seconds into the game, five minutes into the second quarter, or on the last shot.

This isn't a foul; it's a player who felt a bit of contact and rather than focus on his shot, started hoping for free throws.

+1 Really poorly executed flop, significantly after everything was over.

No foul.

I'm not saying that I would have called it at any point in the game, only that if one were looking to call something then it was there.

In addition, if they would have called it two minutes earlier and/or had called it consistently during the game then they should have called it there. Crew consistency from start to finish is so critical to what we do.

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

And I barely, if at all, see two hands on the shooter.

I'll play devil's advocate...
 

Exact same play, only it's a high school game…Fed rules…anybody calling this?

Not me. Don't see how a mere touch effected this shot.
Now on the other hand, I have had defenders want to "tummy touch or leg touch" the 3 point shooter. After I have warn them to knock it off and they continue, I will call this a foul.

NBE: Call that a foul, on that player, at that time, in that game . . .? not if you want your contract to stay intact . . .

What does HS rules have to do with this play? The concept of fouls are pretty much the same at all levels of basketball. And the NBA calls more fouls on shooters than most officials at the HS and college ranks. I would not call this a foul anywhere. There was no displacement and touching is not a foul in itself.

Peace

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.

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

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

Not a foul.

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

OKREF

Not a foul.

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

(Fixed it for you.)

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.

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.

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.

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.