Principle of Verticality

Freddy

tref wrote
Coach: Why is that not a foul?
Me: Because this is not 6th grade girls basketball...

Coach: Why is that not a foul?
Me: It was, coach, but I didn't call it because I felt you haven't been paying attention to me lately.

Scrapper1

GoodwillRef wrote
"Are you telling me there wasn't any contact down there on that shot?"

"Of course there was, Coach. And your player caused it."

That is my actual response to that question.

bob jenkins

Scrapper1 wrote
"Of course there was, Coach. And your player caused it."

That is my actual response to that question.

I've used that.

I've also used "Yes, but defense had good position" and "Yes, but it didn't rise tothe level of a foul"

(And some combination of all of that)

bainsey

GoodwillRef wrote
Is this the must misunderstood rule in the book?

I have to wonder if it's more like blatant ignorance, rather than misunderstanding. Otherwise, why would we get the "set" argument if they even know about verticality?

Adam

bainsey wrote
I have to wonder if it's more like blatant ignorance, rather than misunderstanding. Otherwise, why would we get the "set" argument if they even know about verticality?

Because, while the terms are linked in the book, they aren't linked in the minds of most players and coaches. When they argue a player wasn't set, verticality is rarely an issue anyway because the player was moving sideways or backwards (usually).

I have never heard a coach argue a defender was moving when he simply jumped vertically.

Jurassic Referee

Snaqwells wrote
"Not" should be "knocked."

Nope. He was talking about trees. That means "not" should be "knot", woodn't it?

Adam

Jurassic Referee wrote
Nope. He was talking about trees. That means "not" should be "knot", woodn't it?

I'll have to ask Woody next time I see him.

NoFussRef

Would you call an offensive foul if they only shaved a lil bark?

Subsequently:
If a tree FLOPS in the lane but no one is around to hear it....:rolleyes:

bob jenkins

Snaqwells wrote
I'll have to ask Woody next time I see him.

Don't bother. He's an ash and will just tell you to leaf.

bainsey

Snaqwells wrote
Because, while the terms are linked in the book, they aren't linked in the minds of most players and coaches. When they argue a player wasn't set, verticality is rarely an issue anyway because the player was moving sideways or backwards (usually).

I have never heard a coach argue a defender was moving when he simply jumped vertically.

Nor I.

My point is, I don't believe this is a misunderstood rule. I believe that some don't know this principle exists at all (hence word "ignorance"). In other words, they believe you can't draw a charge if you're in the air.

Adam

bainsey wrote
Nor I.

My point is, I don't believe this is a misunderstood rule. I believe that some don't know this principle exists at all (hence word "ignorance"). In other words, they believe you can't draw a charge if you're in the air.

I disagree. I've heard more complaints of "wasn't he straight up" than "he was moving" on these plays. They understand it, but only choose to play ignorant when it suits them.

bainsey

Snaqwells wrote
I disagree. I've heard more complaints of "wasn't he straight up" than "he was moving" on these plays. They understand it, but only choose to play ignorant when it suits them.

That could be. I wonder if they know that "straight up" doesn't require both feet on the floor at the time of contact, though.

Adam

bainsey wrote
That could be. I wonder if they know that "straight up" doesn't require both feet on the floor at the time of contact, though.

That's a legitimate question. But if they don't, I guess that would make the rule "misunderstood."

tref

Snaqwells wrote
I've heard more complaints of "wasn't he straight up" than "he was moving" on these plays.

Funny how they always appear to be "straight up" after the contact.

Raymond

GoodwillRef wrote
Is this the must misunderstood rule in the book? It seems that all coach see is the contact...not who caused it...just the contact...not if the defender had LGP and good verticality...just the contact.

Those same coaches are the ones who will tell their defender jumped straight up and down or was just standing there with their hands up.

Adam

tref wrote
Funny how they always appear to be "straight up" after the contact.

LOL, and sometimes even right before the contact. But definitely after the whistle blows and they want to show you what they were doing.

bainsey

Snaqwells wrote
That's a legitimate question. But if they don't, I guess that would make the rule "misunderstood."

Maybe. I believe "misunderstood" means knowing a rule exists, but not knowing its meaning or how it works. I believe that some don't know verticality exists at all, and that goes well beyond misunderstanding. That's ignorance.

Adam

bainsey wrote
Nor I.

My point is, I don't believe this is a misunderstood rule. I believe that some don't know this principle exists at all (hence word "ignorance"). In other words, they believe you can't draw a charge if you're in the air.

Snaqwells wrote
I disagree. I've heard more complaints of "wasn't he straight up" than "he was moving" on these plays. They understand it, but only choose to play ignorant when it suits them.

How in the world do you go from this response:

bainsey wrote
That could be. I wonder if they know that "straight up" doesn't require both feet on the floor at the time of contact, though.

To this one?

bainsey wrote
Maybe. I believe "misunderstood" means knowing a rule exists, but not knowing its meaning or how it works. I believe that some don't know verticality exists at all, and that goes well beyond misunderstanding. That's ignorance.

I personally think they all (95% of players and coaches) know about verticality but simply misunderstand it. Some of them plead ignorance when such ignorance would warrant a foul in their favor.

Again, I get far more compaints when I call fouls on defenders who aren't vertical than when I don't call something against a legal defender. Even when I do get complaints about non-calls, "he was straight up" virtually always satisfies the coach. He knows the rule, he just wants me to forget it when it's convenient for him.

bainsey

Snaqwells wrote
How in the world do you go from this response:.....To this one?

Must be your awesome power of persuasion, Snaqs! 😀

Adam

bainsey wrote
Must be your awesome power of persuasion, Snaqs! 😃

Maybe, but you went backwards.

« Previous Page Next Page »