Gonzaga vs Duke Push with ball (Video)

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by just another ref

10-6-1: A player shall not ....push........by extending arms......


The fact that this player is holding the basketball is not significant. It is a personal foul.

There is no comparison between the OP and a player deliberately throwing the ball at another player.

It reads "by extending arms," not by extending the ball.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

The ball to person contact question is easy to answer Billy.
What type of foul would you charge if a player deliberately threw the ball into his opponent's chest?

Originally Posted by BillyMac

It seems unsporting, but I'm leaning toward personal.

Wait. I've changed my mind.

Wait again.

I hope you are joking.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

It reads "by extending arms," not by extending the ball.

Can you extend the ball without using your arms?

[Raymond]

So I guess if a player grabs a rebound then taps the ball against the backboard we are going to call a T for smacking the backboard since the ball and the hand are the same thing?

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Can you extend the ball without using your arms?

Nope, one must extend ARMS to push. That is exactly what 10-6-1 says. What if the player doesn't have the ball? Do you think that the rule doesn't apply to him? The rule is clearly written to cover action with the arms.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Nope, one must extend ARMS to push. That is exactly what 10-6-1 says. What if the player doesn't have the ball? Do you think that the rule doesn't apply to him? The rule is clearly written to cover action with the arms.

So in the OP you don't have a PC foul. You're going with a T or no call at all?

A T? The foul was not flagrant, intentional, or unsporting. But there was displacement and advantage gained.


So?

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by just another ref

So in the OP you don't have a PC foul. You're going with a T or no call at all?

A T? The contact was not flagrant, intentional, or unsporting. But there was displacement and advantage gained.


So?

I have nothing. I would also have nothing if the defender blocked a shot attempt while the ball was still in the offensive player's hands and the force applied to the ball caused the offensive player to be displaced or fall to the ground.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

I have nothing. I would also have nothing if the defender blocked a shot attempt while the ball was still in the offensive player's hands and the force applied to the ball caused the offensive player to be displaced or fall to the ground.

So you would recommend teaching this tactic. It could be useful when a player has a big size advantage and can palm the ball. Extend the ball and give the opponent a shove, thus creating some space, and score.

[Adam]

If a player uses the ball to push an opponent, the chances are slim that I'll be able to see that there was no hand to body contact. I'm not that good.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Adam

If a player uses the ball to push an opponent, the chances are slim that I'll be able to see that there was no hand to body contact. I'm not that good.

I think that's what happened in the o p. But I don't see that it makes any difference.

[Jay R]

Originally Posted by deecee

Using the ball as you own personal mechanism to displace an opponent may not be specifically spelled out in the rule book for some folks on here but here is a spot where common sense should kick in.

And as these responses prove, common sense doesn't always kick in. Here the official calls a player control foul which no one questions. The game continues smoothly. Imagine no calling that play and then saying to the coach it's a no call because he used to "ball" to push off. The game does not continue smoothly.

You can say that I'm ignoring the rule, but I am following the spirit of the rule.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by just another ref

I think that's what happened in the o p. But I don't see that it makes any difference.

You haven't answered Nevada's question about the blocked shot.

[deecee]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

You haven't answered Nevada's question about the blocked shot.

Comparing a blocked shot to a willful use of the ball to cause displacement is 2 completely different actions and cannot be compared.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by deecee

Comparing a blocked shot to a willful use of the ball to cause displacement is 2 completely different actions and cannot be compared.

Oh, so now intent matters? If A1 loses his balance and in the process sticks the ball out and accidentally knocks down a defender, it's not a foul?

[deecee]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Oh, so now intent matters? If A1 loses his balance and in the process sticks the ball out and accidentally knocks down a defender, it's not a foul?

You are really working hard to come up with crazy hypotheticals to prove your point. I say tomato, you say elephant.