GS/NO end of overtime

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Jay R

No travel. In the NBA, it's legal to fall to the floor with the ball. It's also legal to stand up with the ball.

I thought there was an interesting "off the ball" call late in OT where the penalty was one shot and the ball. Why is that call different than holding a cutter?

I don't know the details, but I know something changes in the last to minutes, because that's when they have to stop the hack-a-whoever "strategy."

[APG]

To answer the first question, yes it is legal under NBA rules for a player to fall to the floor while holding the ball. He could even stand right back up with the ball and be legal.

The 2nd question, the foul was considered an away-from-the-play foul. A foul that occurs with 2 minutes or less left in the 4th or overtime, that occurs away from the ball, is penalized by one shot and the ball. Any player on the floor at the time of the foul may shoot the FT's.

[Jay R]

Originally Posted by APG

To answer the first question, yes it is legal under NBA rules for a player to fall to the floor while holding the ball. He could even stand right back up with the ball and be legal.

The 2nd question, the foul was considered an away-from-the-play foul. A foul that occurs with 2 minutes or less left in the 4th or overtime, that occurs away from the ball, is penalized by one shot and the ball. Any player on the floor at the time of the foul may shoot the FT's.

Thanks APG. Yet I'm pretty sure that if player is cutting to the ball and he is held, it will usually be ruled a regular foul. How do they determine the difference?

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Jay R

Thanks APG. Yet I'm pretty sure that if player is cutting to the ball and he is held, it will usually be ruled a regular foul. How do they determine the difference?

Judgment.

[Kansas Ref]

I guess the ref would try to determine the 'intention' of the foul--was it done as part of a strategy (i.e. stop the clock, put a poor foul shooter on the line, etc...) or was the foul a consequence of normal competitive defensive play--in either case it would obviously be a 'judgement call'--which always opens up a whole nother can of worms.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Kansas Ref

I guess the ref would try to determine the 'intention' of the foul--was it done as part of a strategy (i.e. stop the clock, put a poor foul shooter on the line, etc...) or was the foul a consequence of normal competitive defensive play--in either case it would obviously be a 'judgement call'--which always opens up a whole nother can of worms.

NBA officials go through a lot more intensive training than any of us. I have no doubt that they are all on the same page in regards to how to officiate this type of play.

[Kansas Ref]

At minimum I can agree with you that at least all the crew members would "agree" with each other if publically and directly questioned by the coach, media, or peradventure their assignor/commissioner. However, given the "suspect nature" of the call which is a natural consequence of using "judgement" to rule on the play, it's quite a stretch to think that all crew members would've "judged" said play the same--regardless of their extent of training.