Need some help on a blocked shot

[Pantherdreams]

Feel like there are HTBT and there are some timing issues.

1 - Not only does he block the ball before contact but there may now be live dead ball status. Ie is the blocked ball creating an out of bounds before contact occurs. Now all contact is either incidental or (not sure of NFHS langauge here) Flagrant/Intentional. Can't have a common foul.

2 - OP describes contact on the way down. Who was on the way down shooter and shot blocker, just shot blocker? How far down was the shooter. Once his feet touch regardless of your ruling/feeling on the block he is no longer a shooter. So now contact is illegal contact created to a non-shooter where the ball is on its way out of bounds. Incdental changes.

[nmanzie]

Thanks all. This helps a lot. Again, I am about getting it right. Thanks.

[Amesman]

Originally Posted by JugglingReferee

A good basketball play is also not fouling after the block.

Jug: How far do you take the above on typical 1-on-1 defending a shot? Typically these are HTBT situations but I'm looking for guidance on when to whistle after a "clean" block that gets all ball but follows through with relatively minor arm or even torso bumping —well after the shot has been snuffed and ball and shooter are on their way back down. We're not talking wrist-hacking or arm-obliterating here.

I've been counseled back-and-forth by more veteran refs than me both ways. But most seem to hold once there's a clean block and the shot's clearly not basket-bound, ignore most contact afterward unless egregious. Yet sometimes there's significant contact. Thoughts?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Amesman

But most seem to hold once there's a clean block and the shot's clearly not basket-bound, ignore most contact afterward unless egregious. Yet sometimes there's significant contact. Thoughts?

Deciding when the contact becomes egregious / significant is part of the art of officiating -- and different officials will have different views of the same play.

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by Amesman

Jug: How far do you take the above on typical 1-on-1 defending a shot? Typically these are HTBT situations but I'm looking for guidance on when to whistle after a "clean" block that gets all ball but follows through with relatively minor arm or even torso bumping —well after the shot has been snuffed and ball and shooter are on their way back down. We're not talking wrist-hacking or arm-obliterating here.

I've been counseled back-and-forth by more veteran refs than me both ways. But most seem to hold once there's a clean block and the shot's clearly not basket-bound, ignore most contact afterward unless egregious. Yet sometimes there's significant contact. Thoughts?

If there is contact after the block, but A still lands with ease, then I pass on it. Arm contact rarely, if ever, affects a landing. Torso bumping will though. At higher levels, I let more go. And each game is different - it depends on how the game is going, and if similar contact has been called at other times in the game.

Egregious contact warranting a foul would let too much contact go, imho. (Thinking of how basketball is played in my area.) It is a htbt issue, as you say.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by Amesman

Jug: How far do you take the above on typical 1-on-1 defending a shot? Typically these are HTBT situations but I'm looking for guidance on when to whistle after a "clean" block that gets all ball but follows through with relatively minor arm or even torso bumping —well after the shot has been snuffed and ball and shooter are on their way back down. We're not talking wrist-hacking or arm-obliterating here.

I've been counseled back-and-forth by more veteran refs than me both ways. But most seem to hold once there's a clean block and the shot's clearly not basket-bound, ignore most contact afterward unless egregious. Yet sometimes there's significant contact. Thoughts?

Here is the answer to your question: If the defender did not block the shot, would you call a foul? If you would then the defender fouled even though he blocked the shot. The only clean block is one in which the defender did not foul the shooter.

MTD, Sr.

[Pantherdreams]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Here is the answer to your question: If the defender did not block the shot, would you call a foul? If you would then the defender fouled even though he blocked the shot. The only clean block is one in which the defender did not foul the shooter.

MTD, Sr.

I understand what you are saying here but its the block that causes the complicating factors.

1- Impacts advantage disadvantage. Contact now cannot impact ability to make shot or cleanly release ball. IME Now you are only able to impact shooters ability to land or stay in the play to disadvantage them.

2 - When the contact takes place is now a huge issue:
A) Same as always whether or not the contact happens while the player is still a shooter is key.
B) If they ball is still in play and we haven't ruled/called the ball out of bounds. Because now anything that is not flagrant is incidental.

[Ref_in_Alberta]

Airborne shooter has the right to land safely. Defender has the responsibility to not take away the RSBQ of the offense. In theory... players put or taken to the floor due to contact 99.98% of the time makes said contact illegal and therefore a foul should be called.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Ref_in_Alberta

Airborne shooter has the right to land safely. Defender has the responsibility to not take away the RSBQ of the offense. In theory... players put or taken to the floor due to contact 99.98% of the time makes said contact illegal and therefore a foul should be called.

I think this is key. Sometimes, it's the legal contact on the ball (still in the player's hand) that causes enough of an effect on balance to take the player to the floor.

[Johnny Ringo]

This is an action my partners and I have discussed at length in the past.

In order to get to a position to block shot and the result after that blocked shot results in contact to the offensive player attempting a try - IMO this is an advantage to the defense.

Especially, if there is enough contact that sends the offensive player to the floor.

I would call a foul.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by nmanzie

White is on a breakaway steal and goes for a two-handed layup. While in the air, Green comes from behind and slaps the ball (and only ball) forward and out of bounds. On the way down, green and white tangle and fall to the floor. Green caused the tangle by having more speed than white in this situation, but touched all ball first.

This matters. This doesn't. Based on this description, I have a foul.