RSBQ: Similar Contact? (video)

[JetMetFan]

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.

[JRutledge]

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

[OKREF]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

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.

[just another ref]

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.

[Pantherdreams]

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.

[Bad Zebra]

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.

[Camron Rust]

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.

[deecee]

Originally Posted by jrutledge

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

+1

[zm1283]

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.

[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.

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

Play 2: No call

[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.