Continuation or not?

[JetMetFan]

Originally Posted by Adam

How is it different, by rule, from a layup where we consider continuation from the "gather"?

I believe I have the answer from the NCAAW side of things based on a in-season video we received last year. The jump stop turns the move into two separate acts. The first is before the player lands and the second is when they start to rise again. By definition if you stop your motion can't be continuous. In the case of a layup it's (usually) all one move.

I'm going to go out on a limb and say the rule would be the same in NFHS.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by JetMetFan

I believe I have the answer from the NCAAW side of things based on a in-season video we received last year. The jump stop turns the move into two separate acts. The first is before the player lands and the second is when they start to rise again. By definition if you stop your motion can't be continuous. In the case of a layup it's (usually) all one move.

I'm going to go out on a limb and say the rule would be the same in NFHS.

That's exactly how I see it. If someone can find a case that says something else, I'm all ears. But I've always called a foul on a jump stop (coming down) like this.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by JetMetFan

BNR, can you post that for us?

NCAA-Men's Habitual Shooting Motion

[Zoochy]

Originally Posted by Adam

How is it different, by rule, from a layup where we consider continuation from the "gather"?

I wanted to make that point too. But I didn't want to be labelled "That Guy". There are way too many that would love to chew me up and spit me out when I am the only one out on the limb.
I now have MTD sr and Adam (maybe Rut) seeing things the same way as me.
This is also the 1st time I have seen the call reversed. Has anyone ever seen/had the call changed from 'on the floor' to 'in the act of shooting'?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by JetMetFan

I believe I have the answer from the NCAAW side of things based on a in-season video we received last year. The jump stop turns the move into two separate acts. The first is before the player lands and the second is when they start to rise again. By definition if you stop your motion can't be continuous. In the case of a layup it's (usually) all one move.

I'm going to go out on a limb and say the rule would be the same in NFHS.

Without a case play or interp, I don't know. I think for me it would depend on just how "continuous" the motion was. I know I'm likely to wave off the shot, but I don't know that the rule supports it.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by Zoochy

I wanted to make that point too. But I didn't want to be labelled "That Guy". There are way too many that would love to chew me up and spit me out when I am the only one out on the limb.
I now have MTD, Sr. and Adam (maybe Rut) seeing things the same way as me.
This is also the 1st time I have seen the call reversed. Has anyone ever seen/had the call changed from 'on the floor' to 'in the act of shooting'?

You don't have me coming to your side. You are coming to my side. I would have written my OP the exact same way in 1971 because the rule has not changed since at least the 1962-63 season.

MTD, Sr.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Rich

A foul committed by a defender as a player is coming down into a jump stop qualifies (to you) as the start of the habitual throwing motion?

I'm as liberal of a person as there is at trying to put a foul on the shot, if possible, but I'm not going that far. A shot can certainly follow a jump stop, but so could a pass. To me, we haven't gotten to the start of the habitual throwing motion yet. The foul is before the shot.

Show me a case play that changes my mind.

Originally Posted by Adam

How is it different, by rule, from a layup where we consider continuation from the "gather"?

In NCAA-Men a jump stop also eliminates RA restrictions for secondary defenders. And, of course, we already have the new interp concerning the beginning of the habitual shooting motion.

[Texref]

Initial thoughts when viewing the play live, probably the same as on court official. After replay, don't see anything to change my mind based on what MTD said. NBA/E it's definitely shooting

[JetMetFan]

Clarification Alert!!!

My anonymous NCAAW source - whom I trust and who would definitely know these things - tells me the play in this thread should have been ruled continuous motion. Reason = in this case "it is one move to the basket."

The video I saw on the NCAAW site last year was a similar play but not exactly the same. My apologies for any confusion.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by JetMetFan

Clarification Alert!!!

My anonymous NCAAW source - whom I trust and who would definitely know these things - tells me the play in this thread should have been ruled continuous motion. Reason = in this case "it is one move to the basket."

The video I saw on the NCAAW site last year was a similar play but not exactly the same. My apologies for any confusion.

I can't believe anybody doubted the interpretation I gave in my OP.

MTD, Sr.

[just another ref]

I really don't see a foul in the OP at all.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

I can't believe anybody doubted the interpretation I gave in my OP.

MTD, Sr.

I can't believe you are ignoring that this is a NCAA-Men's game, and a new interp on habitual shooting motion was put out this year.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

I can't believe you are ignoring that this is a NCAA-Men's game, and a new interp on habitual shooting motion was put out this year.

Because the new interpretation had nothing to do with a foul during this type of play.

MTD, Sr.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Because the new interpretation had nothing to do with a foul during this type of play.

MTD, Sr.

It sure does. He got fouled prior to bringing the ball up into a shooting motion.

Still, all this would be irrelevant had they called him for palming.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

It sure does. He got fouled prior to bringing the ball up into a shooting motion.

Still, all this would be irrelevant had they called him for palming.

Bad News Ref:

The new rule change (which I think is an idiotic change made by people who do not have a clue as to why the Guarding and Screening rules were written the way they were written in the first place) pertains to a defensive player attempting to Establish a LGP before the player in Control of the Ball goes airborne, but that is a discussion for another day. That was not the case in this play: But Continuous Motion does apply in this play; an offensive player is allowed to finish any legal foot movement after being fouled prior to the release of the ball for an attempted Field Goal.

MTD, Sr.