RSBQ: Similar Contact? (video)
 

Two plays to consider. One resulted in a no-call, the other in a foul.

BTW, as I post these I want to say the crew on the game did a great job but good, bad or indifferent it's all about the learning process.


<iframe width="853" height="480" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/uMx4FesktN4?rel=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

The first play should have been called.

The second play looks like nothing. But the official has a very good look at the play. I just see no RSBQ affected in this play.

Peace

Agreed. The first one should have been called, the second one, I don't see much.

First one, I have a foul because it resulted in a travel. But if you're not gonna call the travel, I guess it doesn't matter. Second one I have nothing.

I'm ok with the pass on the first one. Except he then has to pass on a travel caused by the contact. If the d teams coach starts asking about footwork I'm not a big fan of "would you rather a foul on that play". I think I woud call the contact a little late, rather then pass on the contact and travel.

2nd one didn't look like as much contact as the first but it does look like the official has air in the whistle before he completes his pass/ play so he may have felt the contact was sufficient to but off balance or impede? I'm probably no calling but ok with the whistle too.

First one should have been called...

Second one...looks slight BUT the official that called it had a good view and I'm wondering if defender knocked the ball handler off his path...in which case I like the call. That was something I really looked for this year early in games to try to set the tone and avoid a lot of bumping the remainder of the game.

I'm OK with them as called (no-call, push) but wouldn't disagree with a foul and a no-call either.

If only one were to be called, I'd be in favor of the one going to the basket over the one just coming down the court without any specific play at hand.

+1

I'm not convinced the first play was a foul on the defender. I don't think the C can see it that well either, and the Trail may be the only one with a good look. From that angle, the dribbler could have initiated the contact.

The second one looks like nothing from the camera angle.

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.

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.

Play 1: Can't really tell from the camera angle

Play 2: No call

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.

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.

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.

Illegal dribble on black #24 before block by defense.

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

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.

Full game
 

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/GSEnRVhE3S4?rel=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

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

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

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 :D

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.

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

The travel is blatantly obvious in play 1. Look at the first video at about 0:17 - 0:18 seconds. Regardless of where you think the gather happens, the right foot either comes down twice after the gather or is on the floor when he gathers, is picked up, and is put back on the floor.

I was working a first round regional game last Tuesday and called two obvious spin move travels on the first 5 or so possessions down the floor. The coach told me that hadn't been called all year. I told him exactly what had happened -- pivot foot lifted and replaced after the gather/end of dribble. His comment, "Oh, I'm sure you're right, but nobody calls that!"

In play one, the contact by defender occurs first. It probably causes the travel.

What about a possible travel in play #2? It's close, imo.

Here's my opinion:

Right foot pivot after the gather, never comes back down. Left foot hops, but the pass is clearly out before it comes back to the floor a second time.

I'm with you there. I think you're right.

But, I think illegal contact in play #1 occurs before (and causes) the travel.

Absolutely, that's why you *must* call the foul.

I agree with Jet that it's probably a foul regardless, but once contact causes a violation, you *gotta* come get it.