Wisconsin-Arizona Player Control Foul (Video)

[APG]

Originally Posted by AremRed

I think this is an ant/elephant play. The ant is the illegal contact by the defender. The elephant is the push-off by the offensive player.

The whole reason the guy is pushing off is cause a defender is running into him.

Originally Posted by APG

The whole reason the guy is pushing off is cause a defender is running into him.

I see your point, but they are closing in on each other about equally. I see the initial contact as marginal and the push-off as illegal. I think the obvious call here is PC....while block could be correct as well, PC is more correct.

[blindzebra]

You can see Johnson's head move after the defender hit him, to me that makes it far from marginal. The push off looked worse than it was because the defender was off balance and stumbled.

[Berkut]

Originally Posted by blindzebra

You can see Johnson's head move after the defender hit him, to me that makes it far from marginal. The push off looked worse than it was because the defender was off balance and stumbled.

Indeed.

There is a pretty clear blocking foul there. Now, I don't terrible mind the idea of passing on it and letting it play out in that situation.

But I am at a loss as to how you pass on contact on a dribbler going to the basket, then nail the dribbler for an offensive foul that is almost certainly in response to the initial illegal contact.

The push off absent the contact would be a great, GREAT call. Ignoring the defensive foul, then calling the offensive in that situation is baffling to me.

[Berkut]

There was another sequence earlier that was pretty bad.

Arizona had gone to the line 3 or 4 times, and Wisconsin not at all, and Bo Ryan was riding the officials pretty hard.

Next play, Kaminsky gets the ball in the post, and I think in my head "If he goes to the basket, he is getting a call here no matter what".

He turns in, hooks Aaron Gordon and shoves Gordon to the floor hard enough that Gordon stumbles and almost goes to his knees. Tweet! Blocking foul.

The contact on replay was Kaminsky's elbow into Gordon's back.

It was a bad call, and it sure seemed like it was a bad call made for a bad reason.

edit: All that being said, Arizona has nothing really to complain about. They were supposedly the best defensive team in the country, and they couldn't stop 1 player all night long no matter what they did. Kaminsky was a beast.

[canuckrefguy]

Originally Posted by blindzebra

You can see Johnson's head move after the defender hit him, to me that makes it far from marginal. The push off looked worse than it was because the defender was off balance and stumbled.

Everybody talks like there's more than one point of contact here. There isn't. The two players only contact each other ONCE - when the dribbler pushes off.

A split-second BEFORE the defender would have knocked him off course, the dribbler extends his arm and pushes him away. The dribbler's head moved as part of the arm motion that formed the push-off, not because of any contact by the defender.

If the dribbler just keeps going instead of pushing off - he gets a defensive foul.

But he DIDN'T just keep going. He pushed off instead.

Offensive foul.

Good call.

[APG]

Originally Posted by canuckrefguy

Everybody talks like there's more than one point of contact here. There isn't. The two players only contact each other ONCE - when the dribbler pushes off.

I completley disagree with this...even if you want to say the defender's contact was marginal, there is contact before the push off happens. Even your stills (which fail to show the forward movement (IMO) of the defender into the dribbler) show there is contact between the two players before the push off.

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by blindzebra

You can see Johnson's head move after the defender hit him, to me that makes it far from marginal. The push off looked worse than it was because the defender was off balance and stumbled.

13:20 in UConn/Mich. St...Napier driving for UConn and there is some contact out high and his head whips around. No whistle there but fouled as he shoots... The replay shown that there was hardly any contact at all up high, and he just throws his head around trying to get a call. So basing a call on the offensive players head moving can be a tricky proposition.

[MD Longhorn]

My two cents (hopefully better than mytwocents's two cents)

This was just about to be a foul on the defender. Illegal contact was ABOUT TO happen - but it never did actually happen. The push off prevented what was likely about to be a block.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

My two cents (hopefully better than mytwocents's two cents)

This was just about to be a foul on the defender. Illegal contact was ABOUT TO happen - but it never did actually happen. The push off prevented what was likely about to be a block.

MD Longhorn:

Great observation! Too many coaches are screaming for a foul before one occurs and then the foul they think is going to occur a different presents itself. That is what happened in this play.

And this type of play happens quite frequently in all games we officiate no matter what the level. It is a good thing that we officials are paid to see the entire play and not just the first half of the play.

MTD, Sr.

[JRutledge]

That is probably the best description MD.

Peace

[Raymond]

It shouldn't matter what he did with his arm, he was already fouled while in the act of shooting.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

It shouldn't matter what he did with his arm, he was already fouled while in the act of shooting.

Okay, I agree with you, he was fouled in the act of shooting. But this doesn't cause the ball to become dead. Does this give him a free pass with the arm. Why wouldn't this be a false double foul?

discuss

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

I think I've seen something like that written in the forum before.

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

It shouldn't matter what he did with his arm, he was already fouled while in the act of shooting.

Apples and oranges to the play you're referring to. This play is exactly what seeing the whole play philosophy is about....whether to call a foul and, if so, who to call it on.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

... It is a good thing that we officials are paid to see the entire play and not just the first half of the play.

MTD, Sr.

I think I've seen something like that written in the forum before.