Would you call a foul if it will give disadvantage to the team fouled?
 

I know you guys go by the book and will call a foul when there's a foul, but would you ever consider the situation before deciding whether to call a foul or play on? I know sometimes for a shooting foul the refs would wait and see how the shot goes to determine if body contacts affected the shot.

But for example a scenario where:

A1 (offense) passes B1 and goes for a wide open layup, B2 sees that B1 lost the guy and intends to go for a hard foul by jumping into A1 without establishing legal position, A1 sees B2 coming for him and spots his teammate A2 wide open under the basket, passes the ball to A2 while A1 & B2 collides into each other while A2 receives the ball, in this case you would call a blocking foul on B2 or play on so A2 can proceed with an easy basket?

The rules (regarding fouls) are different for a player with the ball versus without. For example, two hands on the ball handler is an automatic foul while two hands on a non-ball handler is not necessarily a foul. Similarly, when judging how a players RSBQ is affected, not having the ball makes a difference (it takes more contact to affect a non-dribblers RSBQ, in my opinion). If the ball handler passes the ball to a teammate, he is a non-ball handler and the contact can be judged differently. So something that might be a foul on a shooter may not be a foul on a player who has just passed the ball.

That said, if there is an clear foul, then it should be called regardless. It's not our job to judge what team is helped by a foul. If that were the case, then we would pass on a lot of fouls late in the game to keep the clock running. Perhaps that foul that you pass on is the 5th foul on a star player and the team would rather have the foul than the points. I think we get into trouble when we start trying to overthink things. Just apply the rules.

You do have the option of an intentional foul by the defense which sounds like it could fit in your scenario (contact that neutralizes an opponent's obvious advantageous position; contact away from the ball with an opponent who is clearly not involved with a play; contact that is not a legitimate attempt to play the ball; excessive contact with an opponent while the ball is live). Also, if the contact with the passer is not immediate, it may occur after the shot (and the basket would count if good).

This is a HTBT situation. The 2 possible outcomes from what you described would be

1. no call
2. foul on B2, and you would have to determine if A2 had shot the ball or not when the foul occurred.

I would say the majority of the times this is a no call unless the contact is of the "we can't pass on that variety", but since both players are moving towards each other some spillage is expected.

Don't forget the crap you will get from A coach, bench, and fans if A2 misses the easy layup and you passed on the foul so not to take it away:eek:

I'm assuming this is sarcasm, but when these types of comments come up I let the coach know that it's not my fault his kids can't hit easy layups. They usually don't bring this up again.

So you don't call fouls because another player should have made a lay-up?

That's on way of interpreting what I said, or the other way is I don't call fouls because another player missed a layup.

you are missing the point from the OP … he asked if you pass on the foul SINCE they are going to get an easy layup

My post interpreted is … "DONT PASS ON A FOUL BECAUSE YOU THINK THE TEAM SHOULD GET AN EASY SCORE AND YOU DONT WANNA TAKE THAT AWAY!" they just may miss it and then you put yourself in a pickle

I thought you called fouls based on contact, advantage/disadvantage, hindering normal actions, and such things. Adding in that a player should have made an easy lay-up is new to me.

Specific to this scenario I think I would look at it as follows:

The player is now a passer (not dribbling or shooting).

1)Did the contact disadvantage the player.? ie. IMpact pass, stop the play, take the offensive player out of the play entirely.

2) Is the contact excessive? UNsporting, rough, dangerous

3) Is the contact likely to lead to rough play? Retaliation, expectation that this level of play or contact should be common and ok throughout the game, etc.

If I've got 3 nos we are playing on no whistle. If I've got a yes to any I'm calling the foul.

His scenario wasn't very cut and dry and i outlined the 2 possible outcomes, that without seeing the extent of the contact you cannot say either or.

There are many officials that see a 150lb. guard fly into a 230lb. forward and call a foul on the bigger player simply because the contact "appeared" severe due to the size discrepancy. To comment that what is described in a rather vague sense that either one or the other may occur is wrong.

The thought process is correct that we don't negate a foul simply because a team *may* score and easy bucket, but we also know in these circumstances the level of contact and RSBQ is skewed towards the offensive team. And has been pointed out earlier the contact on a ball handler versus any other player has different standards for acceptable contact.

So the answer is not black or white in this case. If the question didn't have a hypothetical scenario then your answer is 100% correct, however the scenario is vague as to how do we judge contact in a hypothetical without specifying something like "the contact was very obvious and a foul". I covered the 2 scenarios, and I don't think I said that I would pass on a foul simply because of an easy layup. I commented on my response to a very common cause and effect scenario that coaches try and stick us with.

Because of uncalled contact X on Y spot of the floor Player A1 missed a layup.

Usually this is an issue with coaches *when* A1 misses a layup and is faulty logic. My response addresses the action that the coach is really upset with. The missed layup, not the no-call.

Feel free to point anywhere in this thread where someone made that statement.

There it is.

There what is? You said coaches blame the missed lay-up on the contact elsewhere on the floor. I get that from your use of the word "BECAUSE". Don't see that in the quoted post, or anywhere else in this thread.

What I see is that you will pass on an obvious foul b/c you think another, unrelated player should make an easy lay-up. And if the he misses the lay-up, no one should talk about the obvious foul you passed on.

A few years ago, I was working a JV boys game. First half, A1 caught a pass in transition between the table and B's bench and immediately passed to a wide open A2. I called a foul because B1 came up and bumped A1 pretty good (displacement of a couple of steps due to the contact).

I wish I'd had that one back. A1 completed the offensive movements he was trying to do, and it should have led to a wide-open layup if I'd seen the big picture.

No, I'm not going to wait to see if a basket is made on a potential shooting foul, but I will process whether I think the contact had any significant impact on the difficulty of the shot. In my case, the pass was gone before the contact was made, there was no need for that call.