The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #16 (permalink)  
Old Thu Feb 06, 2014, 02:39pm
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: DE
Posts: 226
I like the call. I have some friends who are D1 men's officials who have been told by their supervisor(s) to watch for leg kicks and call a foul on the shooter in this type of play. According to them, early in the season, this was happening and defenders who were within their own space were being called for a foul as a result of contact on a leg kick by the shooter. I agree, thankfully we have not seen this filter down to the high school level (yet).
Reply With Quote
  #17 (permalink)  
Old Thu Feb 06, 2014, 02:41pm
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: DE
Posts: 226
Quote:
Originally Posted by indianaref View Post
if you are asking whether the technical foul was correct, yes at all levels.
+1
Reply With Quote
  #18 (permalink)  
Old Thu Feb 06, 2014, 04:12pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 95
[QUOTE=JRutledge;921593]I have seen some try it, but they are not as good in the execution.

Reason for that is a majority don't have the hang time to make it effective...
Reply With Quote
  #19 (permalink)  
Old Thu Feb 06, 2014, 05:40pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Missouri
Posts: 671
I agree a leg kick should not be rewarded with FTs, and could be called offensive if blatent, but this one just looks like a bad call. The leg motion doesn't appear to be anything more than a typical shooting motion. And even if you did rule it to be intentional, how is that contact more than incidental?
Reply With Quote
  #20 (permalink)  
Old Thu Feb 06, 2014, 07:52pm
Adam's Avatar
Keeper of the HAMMER
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: MST
Posts: 27,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by ballgame99 View Post
I agree a leg kick should not be rewarded with FTs, and could be called offensive if blatent, but this one just looks like a bad call. The leg motion doesn't appear to be anything more than a typical shooting motion. And even if you did rule it to be intentional, how is that contact more than incidental?
Because it tripped the defender. I didn't see his leg kicked out, but his entire body is at an intentionally awkward angle, which makes it look less blatant. It seemed obvious to me that he was trying to draw contact, and succeeded in tripping the defender.
__________________
Sprinkles are for winners.
Reply With Quote
  #21 (permalink)  
Old Thu Feb 06, 2014, 08:17pm
Stubborn Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Columbus, OH
Posts: 1,517
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sharpshooternes View Post
...is this a PC foul or a no team control foul (ie free throws or not)?
I have not seen an answer, and I don't know for sure, but my initial thought is to treat this as a PC foul. The shooter has not returned to the floor, and therefore is an airborne shooter. A foul on an airborne shooter is a PC foul.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ballgame99 View Post
I agree a leg kick should not be rewarded with FTs, and could be called offensive if blatent, but this one just looks like a bad call. The leg motion doesn't appear to be anything more than a typical shooting motion. And even if you did rule it to be intentional, how is that contact more than incidental?
Since when does a player have to mean to foul another in order for a call to be made? Typical motion or not, the player's feet are outside his vertical space. And since the defender did nothing wrong, as he's allowed to jump into that space, the foul call is right.

Plus, if the shooter intentionally kicked his feet out to trip the defense, then you have an intentional foul... not just a PC foul.
Reply With Quote
  #22 (permalink)  
Old Fri Feb 07, 2014, 09:50am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Missouri
Posts: 671
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adam View Post
Because it tripped the defender. I didn't see his leg kicked out, but his entire body is at an intentionally awkward angle, which makes it look less blatant. It seemed obvious to me that he was trying to draw contact, and succeeded in tripping the defender.
Agree to disagree.I see a defender that is off balance and coming toward the shooter that makes incidental contact with the shooter who is making a normal shooting motion.
Reply With Quote
  #23 (permalink)  
Old Sat Feb 08, 2014, 11:44am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 372
okay, as a fan, not an official (I work diamond sports), I see the same.

like a charge call or block, how can a shooter be guilty if the defender comes flying into the shooters space? the shooter is not kicking out. the shooter is fading away to get off a clean shot. the if the defender wants to block that shot, I think the onus should be on the defender to make it clean vertical jump, not the shooter. the defender was flying into the shot and tangled with the shooters feet. the shooter established that space first.

am I off on my philosophy or not seeing the video correctly?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ballgame99 View Post
Agree to disagree.I see a defender that is off balance and coming toward the shooter that makes incidental contact with the shooter who is making a normal shooting motion.
Reply With Quote
  #24 (permalink)  
Old Sat Feb 08, 2014, 05:05pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: In the offseason.
Posts: 12,260
Quote:
Originally Posted by shagpal View Post
okay, as a fan, not an official (I work diamond sports), I see the same.

like a charge call or block, how can a shooter be guilty if the defender comes flying into the shooters space? the shooter is not kicking out. the shooter is fading away to get off a clean shot. the if the defender wants to block that shot, I think the onus should be on the defender to make it clean vertical jump, not the shooter. the defender was flying into the shot and tangled with the shooters feet. the shooter established that space first.

am I off on my philosophy or not seeing the video correctly?
Not seeing correctly. The shooter stuck his leg forward into the path of the defender that would have missed everything otherwise....and the last part is what makes the difference.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com
Commissioner, Portland Basketball Officials Association
Reply With Quote
  #25 (permalink)  
Old Sun Feb 09, 2014, 08:25pm
Stubborn Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Columbus, OH
Posts: 1,517
Quote:
Originally Posted by shagpal View Post
... how can a shooter be guilty if the defender comes flying into the shooters space?...
That wasn't the shooter's space.
Reply With Quote
  #26 (permalink)  
Old Mon Feb 10, 2014, 01:06am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 372
whoz space was it? was it the defenders space?

Quote:
Originally Posted by BryanV21 View Post
That wasn't the shooter's space.
Reply With Quote
  #27 (permalink)  
Old Mon Feb 10, 2014, 08:27am
Courageous When Prudent
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Hampton Roads, VA
Posts: 14,840
Quote:
Originally Posted by shagpal View Post
whoz space was it? was it the defenders space?
Why do you think the offense is more entitled to that space than the defense?
__________________
A-hole formerly known as BNR
Reply With Quote
  #28 (permalink)  
Old Mon Feb 10, 2014, 09:40am
Stubborn Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Columbus, OH
Posts: 1,517
Quote:
Originally Posted by shagpal View Post
whoz space was it? was it the defenders space?
At the time of the shot, the space belongs to nobody. Therefore it is perfectly legal for the defender to jump there.

However, by kicking his feet into that space, the shooter is hindering the defender's ability to make a normal and legal move.

I like to think of a player's "space" this way...

At that player's spot, imagine if they are in a tube. Like the ones participants in the Hunger Games are in before entering the arena (did I just out myself as a nerd?). The player can move up and down in that space all they want, and they are legal. But, if a player reaches out beyond that tube, then we have a problem. And that goes for the offense or defense.

If the player moves to that spot first, meaning actually stepping there and not just reaching there with an arm or leg, then he/she is all good.
Reply With Quote
  #29 (permalink)  
Old Mon Feb 10, 2014, 09:44am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Missouri
Posts: 671
Regardless of who was in who's space, the contact was incidental and should have been a no call. As much contact as gets allowed in the game today and we call it incidental, you are going to call an offensive foul because a shooters foot hits a defender's leg? Come on.
Reply With Quote
  #30 (permalink)  
Old Mon Feb 10, 2014, 09:59am
Stubborn Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Columbus, OH
Posts: 1,517
Quote:
Originally Posted by ballgame99 View Post
Regardless of who was in who's space, the contact was incidental and should have been a no call. As much contact as gets allowed in the game today and we call it incidental, you are going to call an offensive foul because a shooters foot hits a defender's leg? Come on.
First of all, the contact caused the defender to fall. This isn't a case where one player just bumped into another and played on without incident.

Secondly, if the defender had fallen to the floor and hit his head, instead of falling and not getting hurt at all, would you still consider the contact to be okay?

In this play I wouldn't get up in arms about either call (offensive foul or no-call). I'm just saying that a foul call on the offense is justified here.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Help me understand. . . . ChuckElias Basketball 23 Tue Oct 25, 2005 01:43pm
I don't understand fwump Baseball 8 Mon Apr 25, 2005 02:06pm
"I know you believe you understand what you think I said,...." rainmaker Basketball 14 Mon Jan 17, 2005 01:10am
Why do they just not understand? JugglingReferee Basketball 3 Sun Jul 15, 2001 02:12pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:15am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1