Seeing the whole play is fine, but is not the whole story here. The danger, I think, is letting the second half of the play totally obliterate the first. Was the contact by the defender a foul or not? I happen to think it was. So a more obvious, "everybody in the building saw it" reaction from the dribbler shouldn't cause the first contact to be ignored.

This was like the mom with the kids in the back seat. The second hit got punished, even though it was caused by the first.

Then the only answer is the FD foul.
Shoot two shots with the lane clear, ball to the defense afterwards.

By the letter of the law, perhaps this fits. But, for whatever reason, I just don't think you'll ever see this call made on this play. I look at it this way. Did the dribbler really gain an advantage by extending the arm? The way I see it, all he did was take back the space which was his in the first place.

The defender fouls him, why does it matter what the offensive player does next? Whether A1 passes he ball, shoots the ball, or pushes the defender off, the defensive foul has already occurred and you should have already determined that it is or isn't a shooting foul. Only decision left is whether or not we now have a FDF.

I see the first contact as marginal...maybe a foul if it results in an advantage gained. But, it didn't result in any advantage. The dribbler continued on the same path.The dribbler doesn't have any space which is his other than that which he is occupying. The defender is allowed to take up 99.99% of the space between the players. Stopping at the point of contact and not displacing or rerouting the dribbler, he defender didn't foul. So, the space the dribbler took was the space legally obtained by the defender.

Agreed. And no FDF for me. The damage is done. Contact by the defender affected the shot. He missed it. Shoot 2.

Quit making fruit salad.

Contact rocked the head of the dribbler. This is not legal.

OK, I can see that as a possibility.

Block, before the start of the upward motion.

Followed by an offensive foul.

Bear with me on this....I went to an NBA game last year, with arguably one of the top three guys in the NBA. He had a similar play with around 5.8 on the clock and he called a blocking foul as lead on the play, where the contact occured at the elbow. I asked him why he didn't let the play go and apply the SDF mentality. His reasoning was ( in a 1 possession game, team with ball is up one in his game) by calling foul immediately, team up 1 makes two free throws, the team down three has still has chance with 4.5 on clock. And "and 1" make it a 4pt game with two less seconds and game is essentialy over.

Had a block on this been called immediately and Arizona goes to line and makes both free throws, Wisconsin still had chance to get a darn good shot / play off on other end. I realize that the NBA would put ball in frontcourt, etc. etc.

However the logic makes a hell of a lot of sense.....just food for thought !!!!!

Again purists may disagree, but that school of thought will eventually trickle down to the D1......

I'm not Scott Foster, but I too have an immediate blocking foul on this play.

In fact I had a similar play to this with about 13 seconds left and offense down by 1. He hits both ends of 1-and-1 and other team hits a 3-pointer to win the game. Observer was happy I put a whistle on the body bump.

BNR - Do you have an immediate from lead, when you are trained as a SDF guy on a play at the elbow. Normally you aren't thinking of making a call there or even on ball as the lead on that play.... BTW - the "outing of Foster", will cost you dinner on weekend of May 16- 18 !!!!!:D:D:D:D

Well, I know you really meant to say "with arguably one of the top one guys in the NBA" :D

I was the Trail (but Lead had just rotated and I did not vacate my positioning yet), drive started at the stop of the key, curled in my direction, and bump occurred right at the elbow.