Held ball or foul?

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Pantherdreams

NFHS POE states that they don't want jumping onto others to try to create a held ball or go for the ball, but it does specifically state that contact is incidental contact if both players are in equally favorable positions.

Maybe I'm reading this with my own view point but if contact when both players are in possession of the ball or the ball or players wouldn't/don't move anywhere else that seems like pretty equal or favorable position in terms of impacting the play.

In unrelated news FIBA has no such POE.

I also see a dramatic difference between a player jumping/diving from 5 feet away to crash into a player on the floor and a player standing over another player who has to leave their feet to get the ball as the player on the floor tries to rip the ball away from hands.

In both cases the player is "jumping" down onto the ball/player but contact, rough play, access to the ball are not equal. I think this may come down to either:
A) how we're reading to interpreting the POE (that again doesn't exist in 90% of games I officiate)
B) What we are considering "jumping" onto a player on the floor.

Would you allow such action if two players were vertical instead of horizontal with one standing and holding the ball?

[Pantherdreams]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Would you allow such action if two players were vertical instead of horizontal with one standing and holding the ball?

Good question. Would I allow I player to dive or leap or jump to make a play at the ball absolutely.

If they never touched the other player obviously no foul.

If the jump has them tie up the ball and then land belly to belly or side to side with the offensive player simultaneously. Since the ballhandler has no expectation of time and space, and the contact is not significantly impacting the play and I don't feel like its leading to rough play probably calling a tie up.

If the jump has them get to the ball but go and displace the player or roughly move the other player. Probably foul but again intensity, level of contact we've allowing, etc. Come into play.

If they don't get the ball or need to go through to get the ball. And there is substantial contact. Foul

Again all I'm asking for is the same leeway in determining the result of the play. Will a lot of these result in fouls probably, but that doesn't mean they automatically should.

PLayer can belly up and bump players with and without the ball all over the floor. I get that a prone player should be protected in a similar way to a shooter because of their defenselessness. But every bump or collision with a shooter is not always a foul. IN the OP the prone player is in possession of the ball it is no longer loose so the defense is entitled to defend them, and they are not entitled to time and space. If they are roughly landing on players or not playing the ball or knocking them off their spot. Call it away. If they just end up tieing up the ball and part of all of their body ends up on top of the opponent as a result. The fact that they "jumped" to make a play on the ball seems like a silly reason to automatically call the foul.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Pantherdreams

Player can belly up and bump players with and without the ball all over the floor.

They can? As a blanket statement?

[Pantherdreams]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

They can? As a blanket statement?

They can. Sometimes it will be a foul and sometimes it won't.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Pantherdreams

They can. Sometimes it will be a foul and sometimes it won't.

Not on purpose.

[Pantherdreams]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Not on purpose.

I understand your thinking here but I don't think its reasonable to assume that blocking cuts, boxing out, bellying up to ballhandlers, running through the lane, posting up and post defense, denying players etc when contact we deem as incidental is occuring "accidently". People are taking lines and angles for a reason and they are being coached to create or intiate the contact on both offense and defense constantly.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Pantherdreams

I understand your thinking here but I don't think its reasonable to assume that blocking cuts, boxing out, bellying up to ballhandlers, running through the lane, posting up and post defense, denying players etc when contact we deem as incidental is occuring "accidently". People are taking lines and angles for a reason and they are being coached to create or intiate the contact on both offense and defense constantly.

Indeed, but these are not at all the same as diving on a player who is laying on the floor.