Freedom of Movement 10-6-12

[Rich1]

Originally Posted by OKREF

if the defender puts a hand on and removes, and maintains the 6 ft guarding space, any other touch would draw the whistle. If the 6 ft requirement is removed, then the second touch wouldn't draw a whistle.

This sounds like a good baseline to begin with. This is where our judgement should come in. I think of the "hot stove" test as meaning the two touches happen together. I was always told to see it as hand on, hand off, hand on, hand off, hand on...

Under the new rule I don't care where it happens (FC/BC) I just care that it happens. But I do think its reasonable to play on if there is a significant amount of time between the two touches. The intent of the rule is to penalize the defense for those hand checks that would "bother" the dribbler and thus disrupt their play (or freedom of movement) but were not getting called by some officials.

I plan to call this by looking at it from three perspectives: 1) If in my judgement the two touches disrupt the dribbler then I will call it no matter how far apart they are; 2) If in my judgement I think the dribbler is not affected and the two touches are faaaaaaaaar apart, I probably will not call it (but I may verbalize hands off); 3) If the two touches are close together, I will always call it wether or not the dribbler is disrupted. Of course, game management, my partner's calls, and other factors will influence how I call it on a day to day basis but for the most part I intend to call it as written using the professional judgement I am paid for.

[JetMetFan]

Originally Posted by Rich1

Under the new rule I don't care where it happens (FC/BC) I just care that it happens. But I do think its reasonable to play on if there is a significant amount of time between the two touches. The intent of the rule is to penalize the defense for those hand checks that would "bother" the dribbler and thus disrupt their play (or freedom of movement) but were not getting called by some officials.

I plan to call this by looking at it from three perspectives: 1) If in my judgement the two touches disrupt the dribbler then I will call it no matter how far apart they are; 2) If in my judgement I think the dribbler is not affected and the two touches are faaaaaaaaar apart, I probably will not call it (but I may verbalize hands off); 3) If the two touches are close together, I will always call it whether or not the dribbler is disrupted. Of course, game management, my partner's calls, and other factors will influence how I call it on a day to day basis but for the most part I intend to call it as written using the professional judgement I am paid for.

If you're planning to call the rule in this fashion - and if others do the same - what was the purpose of changing the guidelines from a PoE into a rule in the first place?

Originally Posted by OKREF

We had the same discussion. We came to the conclusion, if the defender puts a hand on and removes, and maintains the 6 ft guarding space, any other touch would draw the whistle. If the 6 ft requirement is removed, then the second touch wouldn't draw a whistle.

What does being closely guarded have to do with the rule as its written?

[johnny d]

[QUOTE=

B1 defending dribbler a1.. Puts one hand on him in backcourt..a1 continues up the court now in front court..b1 again one hand on him...are you calling this a foul?[/QUOTE]



Not a chance I am calling a foul on this play, nor did I see it called that way in any college game I worked or watched last season. Two touches occurring 40-80 feet apart, I hope you spent the off season fine tuning your game management skills.

[JetMetFan]

Originally Posted by johnny d

Not a chance I am calling a foul on this play, nor did I see it called that way in any college game I worked or watched last season. Two touches occurring 40-80 feet apart, I hope you spent the off season fine tuning your game management skills.

You may not have seen it but I do know in NCAAW we've been told the foul is supposed to be called on the second touch regardless of whether it happens two feet after the first or 80 feet after the first. The rule states in NFHS and NCAA NCAAW that it's a foul when a defender contacts the ball handler/dribbler more than once with the same hand or with alternating hands. There are no time or distance limits between touches written into the rule which means no limits exist.

I had at least one instance last season when B1 contacted A1 as A1 was nearing the division line then B1 contacted A1 again about 5 or 6 seconds later and I called the foul. B's head coach complained but after I made the call I told her the first contact was in the backcourt. She didn't say another word and my supervisor never brought it up (and believe me, he would have brought it up).

[johnny d]

Originally Posted by JetMetFan

The rule states in NFHS and NCAA that it's a foul when a defender contacts the ball handler/dribbler more than once with the same hand or with alternating hands. There are no time or distance limits between touches written into the rule which means no limits exist.

I have not read the new NFHS version of the rule yet. I was told it was the same as the NCAA-M, but that could be erroneous information. I have no idea what the NCAA-W rule states. However, the NCAA-M rule states it is illegal to continually jab an opponent by extending an arm and placing a hand or forearm on the opponent. As you can see below (taken directly from dictionary for definition of continually), at least in the NCAA-M version of the rule, time and distance are part of the rule as defined.


1.

very often; at regular or frequent intervals; habitually.


2.

without cessation or intermission; unceasingly; always.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by The_Rookie

Went to a meeting this morning and conversation broke out on this topic...

B1 defending dribbler a1.. Puts one hand on him in backcourt..a1 continues up the court now in front court..b1 again one hand on him...are you calling this a foul? Or is it when done repeated and constant manner in short time frame.

I am not calling that. And there is still a thing in the rulebook, which has never been changed called "incidental contact." So a play with that far apart situation I do not see any reason to make that kind of call IMO.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by The_Rookie

How does the "new rule" on contact on a ball handler on the perimeter compare to how you would call this type of contact it in the post area?

2012-13 NFHS Points of Emphasis:
b. Post play. Any tactic using hands, arms or body to control the movement of an opposing player.
Examples of illegal post play.
1. Hooking by the offensive player
2. Pushing, holding or slapping an opponent
3. Dislodging an opponent by using a leg or knee to the rear of an opponent
4. Dislodging an opponent by backing them down

[Welpe]

Here's the text of the new rule:

10-6-12

The following acts constitute a foul when committed against a ball handler/dribbler:

a. Placing two hands on the player.

b. Placing an extended arm bar on the player.

c. Placing and keeping a hand on the dribbler.

d. Contacting the player more than once with the same hand or alternating hands.