Held ball or foul?

[SNIPERBBB]

Originally Posted by Pantherdreams

He/she/they should call a jump here.

Unless the contact is clearly intent on landing on/into the player as an excuse to crash and no a play on the ball.

You've got a player on the floor who doesn't have any sort of legal position, another player making a play on the ball. Unless you can tell that the contact is clearly disadvantaging a player (laying on the ground unable to do anything with no expectation of time and space.) Then contact is incidental and we jump it up.

Unless they feel like him was creating excessive contact leading to rough play by them.

Laying on the court is a legal position, nfhs a player has to the to his/her spot as long as they got there legally first.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by SNIPERBBB

Laying on the court is a legal position, nfhs a player has to the to his/her spot as long as they got there legally first.

Exactly, pretty much all positions are legal except when such position is used to impede an opponent.

[Pantherdreams]

Originally Posted by SNIPERBBB

Laying on the court is a legal position, nfhs a player has to the to his/her spot as long as they got there legally first.

Yes poor word choice on my part. I meant there was no spot to displace him off of or movement to impede. Contact made by landing "on top" isn't going to move him further into the floor, certaingly isn't going to stand him up. Ball has no where to be except either between the bodies which means the ball is getting contact/tied up first or the ball is off the side but the defensive contact is not putting the offense at any immediate disadvantage. Unless players are carshing in from the side and dog piling just to create contact, then calling fouls on players diving on loose balls probably isn't going to get you appreciated by fans, coaches, players or supervisors/partners IMO.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Pantherdreams

Yes poor word choice on my part. I meant there was no spot to displace him off of or movement to impede. Contact made by landing "on top" isn't going to move him further into the floor, certaingly isn't going to stand him up. Ball has no where to be except either between the bodies which means the ball is getting contact/tied up first or the ball is off the side but the defensive contact is not putting the offense at any immediate disadvantage. Unless players are carshing in from the side and dog piling just to create contact, then calling fouls on players diving on loose balls probably isn't going to get you appreciated by fans, coaches, players or supervisors/partners IMO.

I disagree 100% with this post. We aren't there for the appreciation of any of the people you mention. How about calling a foul on such a play in the interest of protecting player safety? That's actually a reason that officials are there.

[Freddy]

Originally Posted by Pantherdreams

...calling fouls on players diving on loose balls probably isn't going to get you appreciated by fans, coaches, players or supervisors/partners IMO.

The original topic dealt with a player jumping on top of another player.
If this response is in reference with that situation it's the wrong aim; not just a poor word choice, a poor ethical choice.
Assessment of reason for officiating suggested. If that's what was meant.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Pantherdreams

Yes poor word choice on my part. I meant there was no spot to displace him off of or movement to impede. Contact made by landing "on top" isn't going to move him further into the floor, certainly isn't going to stand him up. Ball has no where to be except either between the bodies which means the ball is getting contact/tied up first or the ball is off the side but the defensive contact is not putting the offense at any immediate disadvantage. Unless players are crashing in from the side and dog piling just to create contact, then calling fouls on players diving on loose balls probably isn't going to get you appreciated by fans, coaches, players or supervisors/partners IMO.

Jumping on another player is a foul, every time.

If you want an advantage to consider, by jumping on the other player the jumper gained access to the ball they would not have otherwise. The advantage/disadvantage is not always the effect is has on the fouled player but the benefit gained by the fouling player.

[Pantherdreams]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Jumping on another player is a foul, every time.

If you want an advantage to consider, by jumping on the other player the jumper gained access to the ball they would not have otherwise. The advantage/disadvantage is not always the effect is has on the fouled player but the benefit gained by the fouling player.

Since gravity doesn't allow him to maintain a legal guarding position without affording him time and space that the player with the ball is not entitled to, I'm not sure I buy that. If I see having to make contact in this case as gainining advtange (when if the player had been vertical he could have reached in for the ball and bellied up) then suddenly the player on the floor is entitled to more time and space then if we was standing.

I'm also not sold on this interp being shared by forum members on this topic and the shot block topic. The fact that a path will result in contact does not mean that the resulting action is a foul. All sorts of paths lead to contact it is our determination which decides if any of those contacts impacts the play in way that = a foul call. Calling a foul because the only way it could have happened was with contact is not a criteria for a foul call. He could have gotten access to the ball any number of ways. Standing over him, reaching down, laying down beside him and reaching across . . . the contact was caused to his choice of action but the choice of action gained him no more advantage then the rules or any other action would allow.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Pantherdreams

Since gravity doesn't allow him to maintain a legal guarding position without affording him time and space that the player with the ball is not entitled to, ....

What does LGP have to do with this play? Not every foul is based on LGP.

[jeremy341a]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Jumping on another player is a foul, every time.

If you want an advantage to consider, by jumping on the other player the jumper gained access to the ball they would not have otherwise. The advantage/disadvantage is not always the effect is has on the fouled player but the benefit gained by the fouling player.

This sounds a lot like my argument on the block shots in which the ball is hit first and then there is significant body contact with displacement.

[Rob1968]

A1, standing, holding the ball, is run into by B1, who then reaches for the ball. FOUL.

A1, lying on the floor, holding the ball, is jumped on by B1, who then reaches for the ball. FOUL.

JMHO (Yeah, I'm sometimes not subtle in expressing my opinion.)

[Pantherdreams]

Originally Posted by Rob1968

A1, standing, holding the ball, is run into by B1, who then reaches for the ball. FOUL.

A1, lying on the floor, holding the ball, is jumped on by B1, who then reaches for the ball. FOUL.

JMHO (Yeah, I'm sometimes not subtle in expressing my opinion.)

No disagreement in principle beyond when we use words phrases like "jumped on" or "runs into" mentally each person can see something very different. If I see player laying on the floor and to get the ball they are holding a player reaches down for the ball and leaves their feet landing on the ball and player. That is very different from someone who dives shoulder first into someone and then reaches for the ball. Both "jumped on a player".

Same as if someone is standing and the defender closes the space grabbing and the ball and creating contact at the same time, that is very different from someone who comes in checks a player off balance and then goes for the ball. Players run into/bump into (pick an adjective I guess) players all the time but if that contact doesn't knock them off stride or off the balance/rythm etc then its not a foul. If it wouldn't be a foul in that situation, the next play when tying up the ball legally shouldn't become a foul because after there was incidental contact and then there was a jump ball.

Player with the ball has no expectation of time and space. That doesn't give defenders a license to hit them but it does allow them to be tight enough that unless the player with the ball reverse pivots or moves the ball away that the ball would be in contact with the defender and certain parts of the body woudl likely be body to body. This includes the player on the floor who has the added problem of not being able to move away (which isn't the defenses problem and shouldn't take away/change any regular rules applying to them).

To be clear if the player is on the floor and some jumps into them violently discplacing them or moving them into a travel or jarring the ball loose then I'm going to have a foul. If a player is standing by or above a player laying on the ground and jumps on the ball another player is holding and lands on the player as a result that's not getting a foul.

[Adam]

My rule of thumb, if the joint custody is established prior to B1 landing on top of his opponent, I'll give them a held ball.
If not, I'm calling a foul most times.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Pantherdreams

No disagreement in principle beyond when we use words phrases like "jumped on" or "runs into" mentally each person can see something very different. If I see player laying on the floor and to get the ball they are holding a player reaches down for the ball and leaves their feet landing on the ball and player. That is very different from someone who dives shoulder first into someone and then reaches for the ball. Both "jumped on a player".

...


To be clear if the player is on the floor and some jumps into them violently discplacing them or moving them into a travel or jarring the ball loose then I'm going to have a foul. If a player is standing by or above a player laying on the ground and jumps on the ball another player is holding and lands on the player as a result that's not getting a foul.

Sorry, that too should be a foul. That is exactly the kind of stuff the NFHS is referring to in their POE's on rough play.

The only case the player is not getting a foul is if they both jump towards the same spot from equally advantageous positions.

Jumping on another player who is on the floor is not legal play, even if you get the ball, even if the player gets to the ball before landing on the player. The NFHS made that very clear 2-3 years ago.