Freedom of Movement 10-6-12

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

From post #46 (I think)...these are your words:

"If one touch happens in the back court and then 20 feet later there is a touch in the front court with a chasing defender, I am not calling that a foul just because there was a second touch."

So you did put distances and locations into this discussion...

Not that I am surprised, but you not seem to read these post long before that comment. And then I commented on my position right afterwards.

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.

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.

Originally Posted by JetMetFan

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).

Originally Posted by Rich1

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.

I know, only focus on my comments.

Peace

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Not that I am surprised, but you not seem to read these post long before that comment. And then I commented on my position right afterwards.



I know, only focus on my comments.

Peace

To both you and BNR...

I never said you were the first, or the only, one to insert a distance factor into the discussion. But your claim that you hadn't put distance in was wrong. You did put a distance factor into the discussion.

So again for both you and BNR...what is the maximum distance at which you will no longer call a second touch a foul?

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

...

So again for both you and BNR...what is the maximum distance at which you will no longer call a second touch a foul?

I'll know it when I see it. More than likely, whether it's the first or second touch, I'll be judging each touch on it's own merits unless I consider the multiple touches as "hot stove" touching. But what about:

Originally Posted by just another ref

Like Rut, I actually have a problem with "2 touches = foul PERIOD" Conceivably there could be 2 touches by the same defender on the same ballhandler 2 minutes and 80 feet apart, with neither touch alone amounting to anything, but...........

How come it is common sense not to call this as a foul? At what time and distance is common sense eliminated and a foul shall be called?

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

I'll know it when I see it. More than likely, whether it's the first or second touch, I'll be judging each touch on it's own merits ...

Isn't that exactly what the NF is trying to get rid of? Your "I'll know it when I see it" is different from your partners, and the next crew, and the next, etc...

So make it simple...a second touch with the same or alternate hands is a foul. And voila - there is no need to judge each touch on it's own merits - a second touch is a foul. Don't do it. They get the message really quickly.

2 minutes apart? Seriously? When was the last game you worked where one kid dribbled for 2 minutes?

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

Isn't that exactly what the NF is trying to get rid of? Your "I'll know it when I see it" is different from your partners, and the next crew, and the next, etc...

So make it simple...a second touch with the same or alternate hands is a foul. And voila - there is no need to judge each touch on it's own merits - a second touch is a foul. Don't do it. They get the message really quickly.

I've never had a problem calling contact on dribblers, so the rule isn't targeting me. I don't need to wait for 2 touches 30' and 10 seconds apart. I get the first one.

Originally Posted by rockyroad

2 minutes apart? Seriously? When was the last game you worked where one kid dribbled for 2 minutes?

In HS...I have worked more than a handful of games where a kid has held the ball for 1-2 minutes as a delaying tactic.

And you still didn't answer the question. What is the arbitrary time limit where you don't dismiss the question with a response of "seriously"?

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

And you still didn't answer the question. What is the arbitrary time limit where you don't dismiss the question with a response of "seriously"?

OK...I will not work a game this season without a shot clock. HS games all have either 30 or 35 second shot clocks here. So I won't see a 2 minute time frame that you are so worried about.

To answer your question - which by the way you have yet to do for my question - as long as that player is still a ballhandler, that defender may not touch them a second time with either hand. There is no time limit and there is no distance limit for me.

Now...what is your arbitrary distance where you will no longer call the second touch a foul without dismissing the question by asking another question?

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

OK...I will not work a game this season without a shot clock. HS games all have either 30 or 35 second shot clocks here. So I won't see a 2 minute time frame that you are so worried about.

JAR brought it up since some of you were insistent that a second touch, no matter how long and how far from the first touch, had to be a foul. Some of us do not work HS games that have shot clocks (imagine that), so some of us work games where a PG will dribble out the last 1-2 minutes of a quarter. So based on your interpretation of the rule, if that PG had a hand touch him when he first received the ball in the backcourt with 1:56 remaining, then got touched again with 0:10 remaining, that is an automatic foul. But your response to calling a foul in that situation when I post it was "seriously". Now you are changing up and saying you would call a foul. Not my fault you had to be a smart-a$$ because it was too much to consider that the shot clock is not universal.

Originally Posted by rockyroad

...To answer your question - which by the way you have yet to do for my question - as long as that player is still a ballhandler, that defender may not touch them a second time with either hand. There is no time limit and there is no distance limit for me.

Now...what is your arbitrary distance where you will no longer call the second touch a foul without dismissing the question by asking another question?

I don't have a time limit or distance limit. I'll continue to do what I do until the FED interprets the "second touch" has anytime, anywhere.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

I've never had a problem calling contact on dribblers, so the rule isn't targeting me. I don't need to wait for 2 touches 30' and 10 seconds apart. I get the first one.

Same here. The first touch is often a foul. Players cannot help themselves most of the time. Then when you call it a few times, you do not have to call it again in the same way.

Peace

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

To both you and BNR...

I never said you were the first, or the only, one to insert a distance factor into the discussion. But your claim that you hadn't put distance in was wrong. You did put a distance factor into the discussion.

So again for both you and BNR...what is the maximum distance at which you will no longer call a second touch a foul?

I was responding to someone else making a claim that the NCAAW's interpretation is the NF interpretation. And that is why I asked my state administrator for his take to clarify if that was the case. His opinion is that RSBQ should play a role of the touches are that far apart on either touch.

I do not have a maximum distance, because I consider these acts to be at one basket time. If you touch once and it does not change the RSBQ of the ball handler and you get beat or back off significantly and several seconds are going by, the next touch should be judge on its own merits. To me one touch-two touch has to come about in the same sequence or time frame. And I also have no problem calling these fouls when they take place. I just find the NCAAW's interpretation to be inappropriate unless the NF says otherwise, which it appears they have not addressed the NCAAW's interpretation.

Peace