Duke vs North Carolina (2015) (Videos x2)

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Adam

On the second one, if he had grabbed the waste

As officials, we always try to avoid picking up the dirty end of the stick. :0

And, on the play, if he had reached out an arm to impede the player, we'd have nothing other than a common foul.

[BryanV21]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

....And, on the play, if he had reached out an arm to impede the player, we'd have nothing other than a common foul.

Great point. I guess if the "kick" was done as a fighting or aggressive act, then a FF1/IF is warranted. Otherwise a PC is good, as is the case on this play.

[La Rikardo]

First play: I prefer FF1.

Second play: I'd prefer a common foul here, but I think FF1 is completely justifiable. Since common foul wasn't an option at the monitor, I have no issues with them going FF1.

Originally Posted by BryanV21

Great point. I guess if the "kick" was done as a fighting or aggressive act, then a FF1/IF is warranted. Otherwise a PC is good, as is the case on this play.

What do the rules say? If you deem anything to be "fighting" it's an automatic flagrant (NFHS) or Flagrant 2 (NCAA). What we need to consider for an INT/F1 foul is whether or not the contact was excessive. By my view of this kick, it was absolutely excessive.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by AremRed

What do the rules say? If you deem anything to be "fighting" it's an automatic flagrant (NFHS) or Flagrant 2 (NCAA). What we need to consider for an INT/F1 foul is whether or not the contact was excessive. By my view of this kick, it was absolutely excessive.

I don't see this as a kick any more than using the forearm to push off as a punch. It was not a strike, it was simply used to push the player away in pretty much the same manner as any other push off. If, instead, he had jabbed or swung the foot (like swinging elbows), F1, sure, maybe even F2.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

I don't see this as a kick any more than using the forearm to push off as a punch. It was not a strike, it was simply used to push the player away in pretty much the same manner as any other push off. If, instead, he had jabbed or swung the foot (like swinging elbows), F1, sure, maybe even F2.

I think there's a difference. Other than your own propulsion, there is nothing you can do with your foot on the basketball court that's legal. As much emphasis as we have placed on the hand check, a lot of it still goes on. You put your foot where it doesn't belong, even by accident, if there's contact, that's a foul. With that in mind, I see any deliberate contact with the foot/leg as excessive. I think both of these were deliberate.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by just another ref

I think there's a difference. Other than your own propulsion, there is nothing you can do with your foot on the basketball court that's legal. As much emphasis as we have placed on the hand check, a lot of it still goes on. You put your foot where it doesn't belong, even by accident, if there's contact, that's a foul. With that in mind, I see any deliberate contact with the foot/leg as excessive. I think both of these were deliberate.

You can't really use your elbows/forearms for anything legal and useful either. I've never seen someone shoot, dribble, pass, etc. with their elbows. Yet, few fouls (push-offs, in particular) are ever called as excessive. Same with a defender/screener using the knee. We just call a block when someone sticks out their knee to either cut off someone's path or push them out of the post (knee used to displace them).

Excessive contact is about the amount of force, not the body part used to apply it or even the intent to use it.

I don't disagree that it is probably an automatic foul, but without more than just using it to nudge the player back or keep him at a distance, I just don't see how the contact was excessive....and neither did the crew on this game. And they clearly saw it and could have easily gone there.