Thank you for sharing these. Good plays to review. At first I thought play #5 was a no call- but offensive player did displace the defender who established legal guarding position- at least twice. Great breakdown on this play.
Glad you enjoyed them. #5 is a commonly ruled a no call by many officials, but this is a foul and not calling gives the offensive player an advantage over his LGP defender.
the assesment you made about #2 makes me wanna undo subscribed..... official in the court made the right call , defender attack the shooter's sylinder from landing !
I'm sorry you feel so strongly about this play. Certainly we as officials will never see every play identically and many times will pass on contact that, by the book, is illegal. But here at the Officials Institute, we can only reference plays as they are written, which is what we tried to do here. The defender had LGP and was displaced by the dribbler with the push. I agree, however, that if you decide to pass on this contact, you should also pass on the contact that happened after the shot as it too "did not cause enough damage." Thanks for watching.
@@OfficialsInstitute Wow - that's really saying two wrongs make it right. I agree wholeheartedly there were two fouls on this play. The first was the offensive foul which should have been called. If the offensive foul was called the second "foul" was no foul at all since the whistle on the prior offensive foul makes it a dead ball. However, missing or passing on the first foul should never result in an intentional pass on a follow up foul. I call each as I see them and don't try to play catch up.
@@OrionCorsari not two wrongs make a right. If the first contact was deemed nothing, by using the same gauge on contact, the second would also fall in the acceptable range resulting in another no call.
@@xoxo.charchar I agree to a point Charlotte. If you honestly feel the contact by the offensive player was not a foul - it would make sense that you would view the defenders contact the same. The problem however, is that the the offensive player did commit a player control foul. Missing it and then trying to atone by intentionally passing on another foul is not something I’d do. I think it’s best to just own it and move on immediately. I Might as well say right here again, I’m new and really enjoy and benefit from the work that goes into these presentations/discussions.
Having 2 hands on a player without the ball is not necessarily a foul. In this play, once the post player gets the ball, it does appears the defender removes his hands.
@@OfficialsInstitute thank you! Absolutely love your content! Quality, and very informative! Thank you for doing it! I know this South Dakota official appreciates you!
Out of these #5 plays, 1-4 are pretty clear ie control player foul except the fifth play is said to be 50-50. The White OP is executing spin off layout n no evidence of shoving/elbow or violent bodily contact. In this case, I would rather opt for no call n let the game goes on.
The elbow on the spin in this play is very suspect, however, the player control foul on #5 is the result of a backdown. A player with the ball should not contact an opponent in his path. This player did just that, multiple times, bumping a defender with an legal guarding position. These types of plays definitely give an advantage to the dribbler and shouldn't be allowed. Thanks for watching and providing your perspective.
@@OfficialsInstitute Sir, Thks u for ur analysis n explanation! I’m much convince now tt u have enlightened me on aspect of DP’s LGP n facing to which the act of OP kept bumping n gain advantage shall be abstinence. More over the control foul is a result of backdown impact! I’ll be more wary n cautious in due course. Once again, Thks a lot for ur invaluable guidance! 👍🏻👏💪
Play #5 is a common scenario that we as officials pass on all the time. But the reality is, when an offensive player backs down his defender with a LGP, he gains a big advantage.
Thank you for sharing these. Good plays to review. At first I thought play #5 was a no call- but offensive player did displace the defender who established legal guarding position- at least twice. Great breakdown on this play.
Glad you enjoyed them. #5 is a commonly ruled a no call by many officials, but this is a foul and not calling gives the offensive player an advantage over his LGP defender.
the assesment you made about #2 makes me wanna undo subscribed..... official in the court made the right call , defender attack the shooter's sylinder from landing !
the ball dribbler's right hand push did not cause enough damage or make his opponent for being disadvantage ,so no call is the best call !
I'm sorry you feel so strongly about this play. Certainly we as officials will never see every play identically and many times will pass on contact that, by the book, is illegal. But here at the Officials Institute, we can only reference plays as they are written, which is what we tried to do here. The defender had LGP and was displaced by the dribbler with the push. I agree, however, that if you decide to pass on this contact, you should also pass on the contact that happened after the shot as it too "did not cause enough damage." Thanks for watching.
@@OfficialsInstitute Wow - that's really saying two wrongs make it right. I agree wholeheartedly there were two fouls on this play. The first was the offensive foul which should have been called. If the offensive foul was called the second "foul" was no foul at all since the whistle on the prior offensive foul makes it a dead ball. However, missing or passing on the first foul should never result in an intentional pass on a follow up foul. I call each as I see them and don't try to play catch up.
@@OrionCorsari not two wrongs make a right. If the first contact was deemed nothing, by using the same gauge on contact, the second would also fall in the acceptable range resulting in another no call.
@@xoxo.charchar I agree to a point Charlotte. If you honestly feel the contact by the offensive player was not a foul - it would make sense that you would view the defenders contact the same. The problem however, is that the the offensive player did commit a player control foul. Missing it and then trying to atone by intentionally passing on another foul is not something I’d do. I think it’s best to just own it and move on immediately. I Might as well say right here again, I’m new and really enjoy and benefit from the work that goes into these presentations/discussions.
#3 first foul is two hands on the defender.
Having 2 hands on a player without the ball is not necessarily a foul. In this play, once the post player gets the ball, it does appears the defender removes his hands.
Soft.
#5 play: charge or player control foul?
what is right?
player control
What is proper report for player control foul?
Hand behind the head is the signal.
Play 5. It’s a tricky one.
Yes it is. A very common play that even more commonly gets no call at all.
All great plays! #5 I may have a chat with my Lead if I'm the C in that play.
Great Job! Don't be too hard on your C.
@@OfficialsInstitute thank you! Absolutely love your content! Quality, and very informative! Thank you for doing it! I know this South Dakota official appreciates you!
I agree lead reached on that one ...do you have any videos on lead v center calls in the paint?
the iast play was noy clear ar all, for pc foul. no call for me.
Thanks for your input
Out of these #5 plays, 1-4 are pretty clear ie control player foul except the fifth play is said to be 50-50. The White OP is executing spin off layout n no evidence of shoving/elbow or violent bodily contact. In this case, I would rather opt for no call n let the game goes on.
The elbow on the spin in this play is very suspect, however, the player control foul on #5 is the result of a backdown. A player with the ball should not contact an opponent in his path. This player did just that, multiple times, bumping a defender with an legal guarding position. These types of plays definitely give an advantage to the dribbler and shouldn't be allowed. Thanks for watching and providing your perspective.
@@OfficialsInstitute Sir, Thks u for ur analysis n explanation! I’m much convince now tt u have enlightened me on aspect of DP’s LGP n facing to which the act of OP kept bumping n gain advantage shall be abstinence. More over the control foul is a result of backdown impact! I’ll be more wary n cautious in due course. Once again, Thks a lot for ur invaluable guidance! 👍🏻👏💪
Play five to me would have been a no call.
Play #5 is a common scenario that we as officials pass on all the time. But the reality is, when an offensive player backs down his defender with a LGP, he gains a big advantage.
@@OfficialsInstitute Agreed - and should be called so as to reward a skillful defender who has LGP