RSBQ: Similar Contact? (video)

[Nevadaref]

The first play is a foul based upon the contact alone, but it didn't prevent the player from getting the ball passed to his teammate for a wide-open 3pt attempt. Frequently, the offensive team would rather have the open look. So if we consider advantage/disadvantage on this play, then it seems that the official properly passed on the contact.

The second play is marginal contact in my opinion and therefore not a foul.
I will call your attention to the fact that the wrong official is putting a whistle on this. The Trail has the ball-handler and the primary defender all the way to the basket. The Lead has the secondary defender who comes into this situation at the end and doesn't do anything but stand there. If the Lead is penalizing the primary defender, he is doing so improperly and with a poor angle as this defender ends up on the inside of the dribbler. How can the Lead see contact between these two players? If the Lead is penalizing the secondary defender, then this is simply a poor decision as the kid doesn't do anything illegal.

[zm1283]

Not to criticize for the sake of it, but man that was a quick whistle on the second play. I agree with Nevada that the Trail should have the primary defender and leave the Lead with the secondary defender.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by zm1283

Not to criticize for the sake of it, but man that was a quick whistle on the second play. I agree with Nevada that the Trail should have the primary defender and leave the Lead with the secondary defender.

Unless the sound is not synched, the whistle sounds at the time of contact or even slightly before -- way earlier than it should be sounded. A more patient whistle and there's nothing called here, IMO.

And I agree - let the trail get this one.

[bainsey]

First play: I'm fine with incidental contact. You can say that RSBQ was compromised a bit, but if you see the play through, there was an easy pass for the open three.

Second play: The camera angle doesn't see the hand check, which is typically a "knock it off" call for me. If there was a hand check here, I'm fine with it.

[Blindolbat]

First play: I'm fine with incidental contact and if you see the play through there was an easy pass for the open three. He was going the same place with the ball whether he was bumped or not. I say hold your whistle.

Second play: I don't think there should've been a whistle here either. I never see the right hand on the body and again, where is the offensive player going. If the left hand was on him, it certainly wasn't keeping him from getting anywhere.

[maroonx]

Illegal dribble on black #24 before block by defense.

[#olderthanilook]

I have a blocking foul in Play #1 and nothing (borderline travel - but I'd probably pass) on Play #2.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by bainsey

First play: I'm fine with incidental contact. You can say that RSBQ was compromised a bit, but if you see the play through, there was an easy pass for the open three.

Second play: The camera angle doesn't see the hand check, which is typically a "knock it off" call for me. If there was a hand check here, I'm fine with it.

The problem with the first play is that there's a big-time travel after the bump. I think the foul needs to be called there.

I don't see the illegal dribble maroonx mentions.

[referee99]

[Raymond]

#1) Foul. Affect RSBQ and causes a violation.

#2) Marginal, but if called, needs to come from Trail.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Rich

The problem with the first play is that there's a big-time travel after the bump.

I find it interesting how few have mentioned this. We continue to stray farther and farther away from traveling.

[JetMetFan]

Originally Posted by just another ref

I find it interesting how few have mentioned this. We continue to stray farther and farther away from traveling.

If it makes you feel better I didn't even consider the travel when I determined it to be a foul

On another front: for those in the "RSBQ was compromised but he got the pass off..." camp, we're probably going to need to modify that thinking because...lots of people have video cameras (and there are PiTAs like me who post plays on internet forums ). Lots of games below the college level are televised, streamed, etc. In other words, there are many more eyes on us now than there were even five years ago. If either coach clipped Play #1 and sent it to an assignor/supervisor IMO they'd have a legit gripe regarding a no-call.

*HC for Black: "My kid got knocked off balance..."
*HC for White: "The kid traveled before he passed the ball and they got a wide open three."

The fact the NCAA (M & W) is trying to get away from this stuff is another source of pressure for lack of a better word. I know I've had plays in my college games this season that I wouldn't have put a whistle on a year ago until the play "developed." Now they want the RSBQ contact called so freedom of movement isn't compromised and those who know more than me keep emphasizing the same thought process is filtering down to the HS level.

Just my $0.02.

[#olderthanilook]

Originally Posted by just another ref

I find it interesting how few have mentioned this. We continue to stray farther and farther away from traveling.

I don't see a travel in play #1, but there may well be a travel in play #2.