Tripping, Or Being Tripped ???

[Adam]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

2004-05 Casebook 10.6.1E is now gone. It's disappeared into a landfill. That probably means that the ruling is also gone?

Or, IAABO is going off the deep end on their own.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Adam

Or, IAABO is going off the deep end on their own.

It's Thelma, and Louise, all over again.

[BryanV21]

I don't agree with calling a travel on A1. Nothing A1 did caused him to travel, as the travel was actually caused by B1. And if B1 didn't obtain that spot on the court legally (LGP), then it seems as though it should be a blocking foul.

Is it fair? No. But neither call would be fair, so you have to go by the rules and make a decision that somebody isn't going to like.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

I don't agree with calling a travel on A1. Nothing A1 did caused him to travel, as the travel was actually caused by B1. And if B1 didn't obtain that spot on the court legally (LGP), then it seems as though it should be a blocking foul.

Obtaining a spot legally and having legal guarding position are not the same thing. It is not illegal to fall down, unless you fall into the path of another player. If that other player come along and trips on you after, it's his own fault.

[BryanV21]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Obtaining a spot legally and having legal guarding position are not the same thing. It is not illegal to fall down, unless you fall into the path of another player. If that other player come along and trips on you after, it's his own fault.

There's a way to determine what B1 did wrong, and therefore call a foul call. There is nothing to say what A1 did wrong to be at fault and called for a violation. If the players were standing, would you call it differently? And if so... Should you?

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

There's a way to determine what B1 did wrong, and therefore call a foul call.

What did B do wrong? If he takes a position with his back to A1 (no LGP) and A1 subsequently trips on his foot, do you call a foul for that?

There is nothing to say what A1 did wrong to be at fault and called for a violation.

Fell to the floor while holding the ball.

[BryanV21]

Originally Posted by just another ref

What did B do wrong?

It's not so much that what B did was wrong. But the fact of the matter is he doesn't have LGP, and therefore could be called for a blocking foul.

If they both returned to the floor on their feet, and A1 got the rebound... turned... and ran into B1 (who had not gained LGP)... what do you have? A blocking foul on B1.

And it doesn't seem a whole lot different than if B1 is guarding A1 (who has the ball). B1 has not established LGP, and A1 trips while trying to dribble around him. That would be a blocking foul on B1... not a traveling violation on A1.

Why do we give B1 more leeway since he's laying on the floor, and not standing? You don't need intent to call a foul against a player. Heck, there's plenty of times a foul by a player is an accident.

I don't understand treating B1 different here, just because he fell. And at the same time penalizing A1 when he absolutely did nothing wrong. Unless you count not looking down, to make sure nobody fell to the floor, before taking a step after a rebound.

By the way... the reason A1 fell to the floor is because of B1. He didn't just fall... he was tripped.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

I don't agree with calling a travel on A1. Nothing A1 did caused him to travel, as the travel was actually caused by B1. And if B1 didn't obtain that spot on the court legally (LGP), then it seems as though it should be a blocking foul.

Is it fair? No. But neither call would be fair, so you have to go by the rules and make a decision that somebody isn't going to like.

Stepping on a player who isn't moving isn't doing anything wrong?