Kentucky/UConn Continuous Motion (end of 1st half foul) (video)

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Another discussion which we can have would be if the player went up with the ball only in his right hand, was fouled, and then switched it to his left hand before releasing the try. Someone else mentioned the famous Jordan play, which would be a good visual for this action. Should this be considered continuous motion or a new try after being fouled during a previous attempt (or perhaps while not in the act of shooting at all). That's the academic debate this play made me consider.

I think that, at a minimum, as long as the shooter remains in control of the ball, that it should be part of the same motion. It would only be if control was lost that the try might end....as in when a defender knocks the ball away but the shooter somehow grabs it again and puts it in. That may a new motion. And even then, I, I'm not so sure I wouldn't count the shot.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

I think that, at a minimum, as long as the shooter remains in control of the ball, that it should be part of the same motion. It would only be if control was lost that the try might end....as in when a defender knocks the ball away but the shooter somehow grabs it again and puts it in. That would be a new motion.

I would still consider that apart of motion if they were in the air and was able to maintain some level of control. As a matter of fact there was a play reviewed here that was just like that and I recall most people here said it was a good call to award shots. This play in the NC game was nothing like that situation.

Peace

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I would still consider that apart of motion if they were in the air and was able to maintain some level of control. As a matter of fact there was a play reviewed here that was just like that and I recall most people here said it was a good call to award shots. This play in the NC game was nothing like that situation.

Peace

The question isn't about awarding shots but how many (or alternately, whether to count the basket). Does the try end or does it continue? It is a shooting foul either way.

I say the try continues, count the basket, 1 shot.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

The question isn't about awarding shots but how many (or alternately, whether to count the basket). Does the try end or does it continue? It is a shooting foul either way.

I say the try continues, count the basket, 1 shot.

The play I was talking about, the player lost the ball and while in the air, caught the ball with both hands and shot the ball and the ball went in the basket. One FT was awarded too.

When I get home I will look for the play and see if I can post it. Or maybe it was a play where APG's account is locked up on YouTube. I just remember this play because I used it in a meeting to be discussed.

Peace

I remember a similar discussion where a player was fouled in the air, lost control of the ball, regained control, and completed his layup.

[APG]

And here's the thread discussing the play:

Miami at Wake Forest 3pt play

[just another ref]

I don't think you count the basket here.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

I think that, at a minimum, as long as the shooter remains in control of the ball, that it should be part of the same motion.

Does it matter to you if the ball is moved from one hand to the other by having both hands touch it briefly in the transition or if it is tossed through open space from one hand to the other?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by APG

And here's the thread discussing the play:

Miami at Wake Forest 3pt play

That is what I am talking about APG.

Originally Posted by just another ref

I don't think you count the basket here.

I still think this is apart of the shot. Maybe if he lost the ball on the and came back to the floor, but nothing suggest the shot is over because it was out of his hands.

Peace

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

....but nothing suggest the shot is over because it was out of his hands.

By definition, a try ends when it is certain that it will not be successful. There is contact here, after which the ball is released and headed down, not up. It is certain at this point that the ball has no chance to go in. The try is over. The catch and subsequent release is a new try, in my opinion.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by just another ref

By definition, a try ends when it is certain that it will not be successful. There is contact here, after which the ball is released and headed down, not up. It is certain at this point that the ball has no chance to go in. The try is over. The catch and subsequent release is a new try, in my opinion.

NCAA officials will never call this play the way you want it interpreted. You're more likely to see the blarge ruling changed than this.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

NCAA officials will never call this play the way you want it interpreted. You're more likely to see the blarge ruling changed than this.

A couple of things: First, this is a play that is very rare. I'm not sure I've ever seen it before. Second, where do you draw the line on it, then? Ball is out of his hands, then he catches it and shoots again. What if the ball hit the board? Could he then tap it in? What's the difference?

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by just another ref

A couple of things: First, this is a play that is very rare. I'm not sure I've ever seen it before. Second, where do you draw the line on it, then? Ball is out of his hands, then he catches it and shoots again. What if the ball hit the board? Could he then tap it in? What's the difference?

Knowing the common sense difference on such things is often the discriminating factor that allows one person to get hired and another not to get hired.

You may not agree with that line of thinking, but folks who have aspirations of becoming (and staying) an NCAA official learn or get left behind.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by just another ref

By definition, a try ends when it is certain that it will not be successful. There is contact here, after which the ball is released and headed down, not up.

After the release of what? Do yo think that he released it on a try? I don't think that was what he did. I think he bobbled the ball (perhaps caused by the defender or not).

Originally Posted by just another ref

It is certain at this point that the ball has no chance to go in. The try is over. The catch and subsequent release is a new try, in my opinion.

Since it was not a try, there is no try to end (yet).

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Since it was not a try, there is no try to end (yet).

Uh, Camron, if the try has not yet begun, then we can't have continuous motion from the foul.
PS watch out for BillyMac to post an image of Yoda!