Can an elbow to the head be a PC?

[Adam]

I'm with Dan, and so is my state. Our information was that this came directly from Indianapolis (Dan, I'm still working on getting a copy of that powerpoint.)

[SNIPERBBB]

Originally Posted by Adam

I'm with Dan, and so is my state. Our information was that this came directly from Indianapolis (Dan, I'm still working on getting a copy of that powerpoint.)

What is the likelihood of them making this an actual rule so we are not 5-10 years down the road having to try to recall these POE's(like the no circling the court, claiming the center circle), to explain for new officials/or old ones that havent read a rules book since they got their license.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by RookieDude

Take it up with the Big Boys in the "State" Department.

I happen to agree with them. Picture a tall post player pivoting normally and hitting a shorter player in the head. Intentional foul? I think not.

Therefore, I have no problem calling "it" the way the State wants.

Question:
A1 Rebounds a missed try, chins the ball with elbows sticking out. A1 pivots and contacts B1 in the head with their elbow. B1 is in legal guarding position.

A) No call, A1 is making a basketball move.

B) Player control foul on A1.

C) Intentional foul on A1.

D) Flagrant foul on A1.

Correct answer, in these parts; B) Player control foul on A1

Matter of opinion until codified in the rules and the opinion of the various State administrators will be different. Those who wish to put an emphasis on concussion prevention will instruct this play to be called as choice C above.

[RookieDude]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Matter of opinion...

...you say opinion...The "King of the North(West)" says law...

How would you answer the question if you were in these lands?

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by RookieDude

...you say opinion...The "King of the North(West)" says law...

How would you answer the question if you were in these lands?

When the NFHS rules are unclear the individual State associations are the proper authority to issue an official interpretation. So in the absence of anything being issued directly by the NFHS, you should follow what those from your State office desire.

That's what I do where I call.

Of course, any interpretation by any State administrator will still be only an opinion. An opinion that should be followed due to the authority of the position.

[BillyMac]

So this two year old point of emphasis has come down to a "When in Rome ..." issue. Stupid NFHS monkeys. Makes me want to turn back my high school schedule and move over to the college side. Do you think that UCONN would hire me to do all their home games? Do I have to pass some kind of test first?

[Sharpshooternes]

Originally Posted by RookieDude

Take it up with the Big Boys in the "State" Department.

I happen to agree with them. Picture a tall post player pivoting normally and hitting a shorter player in the head. Intentional foul? I think not.

Therefore, I have no problem calling "it" the way the State wants.

Question:
A1 Rebounds a missed try, chins the ball with elbows sticking out. A1 pivots and contacts B1 in the head with their elbow. B1 is in legal guarding position.

A) No call, A1 is making a basketball move.

B) Player control foul on A1.

C) Intentional foul on A1.

D) Flagrant foul on A1.

Correct answer, in these parts; B) Player control foul on A1

So I had this exact play in your question you posted yesterday. I came in with an intentional foul for elbow contact to the head. The girl caught the elbow right in the nose. The varsity official that was evaluating me after the game thought I should have just called an excessive elbow violation. I am all about listening to those who have been here longer than me, but I really had a hard time with that interpretation. One of his P's thought that a PC fouls would have been appropriate. I still think that my sitch is PC at minimum, intentional most likely, but in no way only a violation.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Sharpshooternes

So I had this exact play in your question you posted yesterday. I came in with an intentional foul for elbow contact to the head. The girl caught the elbow right in the nose. The varsity official that was evaluating me after the game thought I should have just called an excessive elbow violation. I am all about listening to those who have been here longer than me, but I really had a hard time with that interpretation. One of his P's thought that a PC fouls would have been appropriate. I still think that my sitch is PC at minimum, intentional most likely, but in no way only a violation.

Unless there was a "swing-and-a-miss" followed by a "swing-and-a-hit", I agree wioth you -- it's not a violation.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Sharpshooternes

So I had this exact play in your question you posted yesterday. I came in with an intentional foul for elbow contact to the head. The girl caught the elbow right in the nose. The varsity official that was evaluating me after the game thought I should have just called an excessive elbow violation. I am all about listening to those who have been here longer than me, but I really had a hard time with that interpretation. One of his P's thought that a PC fouls would have been appropriate. I still think that my sitch is PC at minimum, intentional most likely, but in no way only a violation.

Without contact, I could see a violation.

But, with contact, I'm going with a foul. It could be PC, Int., or flagrant, and even nothing. If it a simple pivot with the arms in a natural position, I'm going with PC no more than a PC. If they are extended or swung, Int. If they are excessively swung, flagrant.

[stiffler3492]

I think the OP was at my game yesterday too haha.

I had this same play. A1 has the ball just outside the block and is guarded by a much smaller B1. In turning and facing the basket, A1 brings his elbows through with the ball held high and contacts B1 above the shoulders.

I went with PC.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Without contact, I could see a violation.

But, with contact, I'm going with a foul. It could be PC, Int., or flagrant, and even nothing. If it a simple pivot with the arms in a natural position, I'm going with PC no more than a PC. If they are extended or swung, Int. If they are excessively swung, flagrant.

If it's a situation that would have warranted a violation without contact, then I think it has to be an intentional foul if contact is made to the head.

Any "veteran" who wants you to go with a violation instead is just in a hurry to get his varsity game started. Just smile and nod, and then discard his advice before you even get dressed.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Adam

If it's a situation that would have warranted a violation without contact, then I think it has to be an intentional foul if contact is made to the head.

Agree.