|
|||
I think you are either (a) a former point guard who has never been undercut on a rebound or (b) a really nice guy who can't see the evil in others.
|
|
|||
I don't think so. If this was a cross into the PA in a soccer game, I've got an easy foul on white, too. (And likely a piece of plastic to go with it -- but a bit hard to precisely translate the play to soccer.)
|
|
|||
Quote:
That's the sort of thing I see here. Perhaps the player in white was trying to box out and instead he displaced an airborne opponent. But, right or wrong, that's not my first reaction to seeing a play like this. If the airborne player is jumping at an opponent (by which I mean the airborne player has some noticeable degree of horizontal velocity in addition to trying to jump straight up) and the opponent makes some sort of motion that looks to me like he's protecting himself, my instinct is to give that player the benefit of the doubt. I recognize that when I'm one of very few here who would not call a foul while some other experienced officials are saying this is borderline intentional, I might need to adjust my perception on a play like this. Beyond Eastshire and so cal lurker, I know there are at least two other officials here with soccer experience. AremRed already weighed in and had a foul on the player in white. Now I'm curious to see what Nevadaref thinks. |
|
|||
As for a soccer equivalent.....consider a cross or corner kick (as you started to suggest) where the defender doesn't try to go up for a header with the offensive player but, instead, runs through his legs as the offensive player is peaking and meeting the ball with his head.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com Commissioner, Portland Basketball Officials Association |
|
|||
Quote:
Then, if you watch the white players feet after he bends over, that tells you everything you need to know. If he was protecting himself, he would be stepping away, not further under the person that was in the air. Instead, he bent over and continued to drive himself further under the airborne player, intending to undercut the player in the air. That is what makes it borderline intentional. He made no play on the ball and created contact that was dangerous. I have also done a bit of soccer...albeit not nearly as long as basketball and not nearly at the same level.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com Commissioner, Portland Basketball Officials Association |
|
|||
Quote:
|
|
|||
Whew. I was gonna say that you might need to re-evaluate how you see undercutting on the soccer field!!
|
|
|||
I agree the first foul on white for pushing red under the basket.
However, once there, red fouls white by jumping back into him. Yes, after red lands on white's back, white gives him a bit of a backside but if we're concentrating only on the jumping action and not the initial push, red is still fouling first by not jumping vertically. Red jumps back into white because if he would have jumped straight up he's nowhere near enough to the ball to have any chance at rebounding. I'm standing by a foul on white on the the jump. |
|
|||
Quote:
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com Commissioner, Portland Basketball Officials Association |
|
|||
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Go around, not through. Red goes through here. |
|
|||
Quote:
I am a former PG and just about everyone, other than my wife, considers me a pretty nice guy. But I have been undercut playing basketball, more than once. And my day job involves working on federal policy in DC. I see the evil in others on a daily basis. I've also seen lots of dirty plays and called my share of intentional fouls over the years. On this play though, I don't see the kid intentionally trying to undercut, injure, or engage in dangerous play. And I don't see excessive contact or any of the elements of an intentional foul. Hell, some people don't even think it was a foul on white at all. I think its a clear foul but intentional would not even enter my thought process on this one. |
|
|||
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
The only reason that ball is behind white is that the white player kept bumping and shoving the red player farther and farther under the basket while the shot was in the air. White then finishes it off with a dirty move of submarining red by bending over and continuing to move under him. There is nothing acceptable about that. Even if the first shove didn't occur, I'm still calling a foul on white. They were both moving towards each other. White made no play on the ball. His only action was to undercut red. Whether red had jumped towards him or not is irrelevant in this play. If white had, instead, tried to go up for the ball, then yes, maybe foul on red. But, again, whites only action was to take reds legs out from under him....and that would have still happened even if red had jumped perfectly straight. No way I'm penalizing red for his actions after being displaced from the spot he had earned or when his opponents only action is to take out his legs.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com Commissioner, Portland Basketball Officials Association Last edited by Camron Rust; Wed Jan 28, 2015 at 06:20pm. |
|
|||
Quote:
I've watched the video about 20 times now and I still don't see white bridging red until white is hit in the shoulder by red's butt. If red jumps straight up, he doesn't get bridged but when you bridge yourself, it's a foul on you. |
Bookmarks |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Disconcertion call (Video) | jeremy341a | Basketball | 12 | Fri Mar 14, 2014 11:38pm |
Should this be a no call? (Video) | jeremy341a | Basketball | 15 | Thu Mar 13, 2014 05:05pm |
Mich Mich St block/charge call, then makeup call (Video) | pfan1981 | Basketball | 23 | Wed Mar 05, 2014 04:48pm |
Yes or No on call, see video | jump stop | Basketball | 18 | Thu Jan 10, 2013 02:27pm |
What's your call? - Video | Kostja | Basketball | 9 | Fri Apr 13, 2007 05:33am |