Held ball or foul?

[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.

[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.)

[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.

[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.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

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 they're not getting a foul is if they 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.

I'll agree with this, even with my previous post. If the player goes airborne and lands on another player lying on the ground, I'm not giving them a held ball.

[Amesman]

Originally Posted by Adam

I'll agree with this, even with my previous post. If the player goes airborne and lands on another player lying on the ground, I'm not giving them a held ball.

But would you give him or her a held ball?

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

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.

I too recall that POE about players diving on top of others. I don't remember which year it was and a quick Internet search didn't bring it up for me. Perhaps another forum member can post it.

[Sharpshooternes]

Originally Posted by Amesman

But would you give him or her a held ball?

Ahhhh snap!

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Amesman

But would you give him or her a held ball?

Well, in that case, it is a them. Can't have a held ball without two or more players.

[Amesman]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Well, in that case, it is a them. Can't have a held ball without two or more players.

Yeah, I figured somebody would call me on that. Good whistle. But then again, the inference would have to be that only one person would want the held ball to be "given."

Man, it really must be the off-season. And it's only May. Heaven help us all.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Amesman

Yeah, I figured somebody would call me on that. Good whistle. But then again, the inference would have to be that only one person would want the held ball to be "given."

Man, it really must be the off-season. And it's only May. Heaven help us all.

Since I'm probably the main culprit on using them and they as if they were singular, gender neutral, pronouns, I have first right on pointing any other violations on their use. I've caught myself two or three times since it was mentioned by Nevada....and am trying to correct my ways. Now, if I can just get someone to invent singular, gender neutral, pronouns.

That said, I may not be so incorrect after all. Here is what ?He or she? versus ?they? - Oxford Dictionaries has to say on the matter:

You can use the plural pronouns ‘they’, ‘them’, ‘their’ etc., despite the fact that, technically, they are referring back to a singular noun:

If your child is thinking about a gap year, they can get good advice from this website.

A researcher has to be completely objective in their findings.

Some people object to the use of plural pronouns in this type of situation on the grounds that it’s ungrammatical. In fact, the use of plural pronouns to refer back to a singular subject isn’t new: it represents a revival of a practice dating from the 16th century. It’s increasingly common in current English and is now widely accepted both in speech and in writing.

I'm guessing the same point would also hold for him/her vs them.

[PG_Ref]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

I too recall that POE about players diving on top of others. I don't remember which year it was and a quick Internet search didn't bring it up for me. Perhaps another forum member can post it.

It came out for the 2008-2009 season. Section "C" is the section relevant here.

2. ROUGH PLAY. For the fifth time in the past eight years, rough play is a point
of emphasis. The committee continues to be concerned with the increasing level
of physical play being permitted. Officials and coaches are charged with
promoting good sportsmanship, encouraging fair play and minimizing the risk of
injury to student-athletes. Rough play creates conflict between players and
increases the opportunity for injuries.A. Post play. The key word is displacement. If a player is displaced, it is a
foul! Offensive players creating space by “backing down” a defender, or a
defender moving an offensive player off his/her spot on the floor, are
examples of post-play fouls that must be called.
B. Hand-checking. Defenders are not permitted to have hands on the
dribbler or offensive players away from the ball. Hand-checking is not
incidental contact; it gives a tremendous advantage to the person using
Page 69 2008-09 NFHS Basketball Rules
illegal hands/tactics. An offensive player who uses his/her hands or body
to push off in order to create a more favorable position has committed a
foul. Regardless of where it happens on the floor, when a player:
1) Continuously places a hand on the opposing player – it is a foul.
2) Places both hands on a player – it is a foul.
3) Continuously jabs a hand or forearm on an opponent – it is a foul.

C. Loose balls. Rough play and excessive contact while attempting to secure a loose ball continue to be a concern. Coaches, players and officials must understand that a loose-ball situation is not consent for a player to “jump on” an opponent on the floor in an attempt to create a held ball. Likewise, merely because a player is “going for the ball” does not give that player permission to “take out” an opponent who is in a more advantageous
position. Incidental contact (4-27) allows for contact when players are in
equally favorable positions.