Wisconsin-Arizona Player Control Foul (Video)

[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.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

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.

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.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by just another ref

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.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Adam

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.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by just another ref

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.

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.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

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.

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

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by just another ref

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

OK, I can see that as a possibility.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

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.

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.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

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.

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

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

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.

Quit making fruit salad.