PDA

View Full Version : Verticality?



AGDukesky
12-06-2018, 12:03 PM
I am hoping some here with better knowledge of the rules and/or a better interpretation of the action that occurred can clarify the referee’s call to me of a certain play. On the play when Barrett got into the air late in the shot clock and was called for fouling the guard (Lynch maybe?), it looked to me that he jumped almost perfectly straight up and the Hartford player made an unnatural move to initiate all of the contact by invading the defender’s space. I know this type of play is often called on the defender, but typically the offensive player was either already moving toward the basket before the defender jumped or the defender clearly jumped toward the shooter. Did I simply misjudge how far forward RJ jumped or am I misinterpreting the rule of verticality (or both)?

CDu
12-06-2018, 12:05 PM
I am hoping some here with better knowledge of the rules and/or a better interpretation of the action that occurred can clarify the referee’s interpretation to me of a certain play. On the play when Barrett got into the air late in the shot clock and was called for fouling the guard (Lynch maybe?), it looked to me that he jumped almost perfectly straight up and the Hartford player made an unnatural move to initiate all of the contact by invading the defender’s space. I know this type of play is often called on the defender, but typically the offensive player was either already moving toward the basket before the defender jumped or the defender clearly jumped toward the shooter. Did I simply misjudge how far forward RJ jumped or am I misinterpreting the rule of verticality (or both)?

Well, it would help to know what play you are talking about specifically in order to answer.

Could be that Barrett wasn't truly vertical (i.e., he was either moving forward or his arms were not vertical). Could be that he was within the restricted area, in which case verticality is irrelevant. Would have to see the video to answer better.

AGDukesky
12-06-2018, 12:09 PM
It was the play toward the latter part of the first half when there was a second left in the shot clock and the announcers were talking about the senior Hartford guard showing his savvy by drawing the foul. It was on the perimeter between the top of the key and free throw line.

Troublemaker
12-06-2018, 12:14 PM
RJ didn't jump straight up and down. If you get a chance to watch the replay, you'll see that before the jump, both his feet were inside the paint and then after the jump, both his feet were outside the paint. He jumped forward, in other words.

CDu
12-06-2018, 12:22 PM
It was the play toward the latter part of the first half when there was a second left in the shot clock and the announcers were talking about the senior Hartford guard showing his savvy by drawing the foul. It was on the perimeter between the top of the key and free throw line.

Oh. Yeah, Barrett definitely jumped forward, by like 2 feet. Also, he wasn't vertical, nor was he making a defensive play as he was off-balance.

It WAS a clever play by the Hartford player (Lynch?) to draw Barrett into the air and then lean in to get the contact. But it was a deserved foul on Barrett.

AGDukesky
12-06-2018, 12:29 PM
Fair enough. I did think he came forward a bit but that the Hartford player leaned a good 2-3 feet forward to get under RJ. Personally, I don’t like that there would have been no contact if the offensive player didn’t make an unnatural move that has no intention of getting off a “real” shot. I’m all for drawing fouls but as part of a legitimate basketball move. I did only see one replay at the time so maybe RJ was more out of position than I thought. Thanks

CDu
12-06-2018, 12:46 PM
Fair enough. I did think he came forward a bit but that the Hartford player leaned a good 2-3 feet forward to get under RJ. Personally, I don’t like that there would have been no contact if the offensive player didn’t make an unnatural move that has no intention of getting off a “real” shot. I’m all for drawing fouls but as part of a legitimate basketball move. I did only see one replay at the time so maybe RJ was more out of position than I thought. Thanks

A few things:
1. The defender can't be moving forward in legal guarding position. Lateral or backwards is okay, but not forward.
2. The move made could have just as easily been the prep for a leaner in the lane. So it isn't 100% obvious that he had no intention of a "real" shot.
3. I don't want the officials legislating intent in live action. And I don't want them going to the monitor to determine intent on common fouls.

It was a smart play by the offensive player to recognize that the defender wasn't in legal guarding position, and to take advantage of that. Barrett himself does similar things frequently. That's just heady basketball.

HereBeforeCoachK
12-06-2018, 01:45 PM
I remember Jimmy V laughing about the concept of "verticality" when discussing a block/charge call.....V said something like "Verticality? That's one of my Italian uncles...."

Actually, this is one area where I think all levels of officiating miss it too much - exhibit A might be James Harden. He is always moving horizontal into defenders, and yet the calls favor him. A lot of times officials seem to mess this one up.

I've always believed, from playing experience (which was not major college but which was significant) that on the court, you know darned well who is vertical and who is moving into the other player. You know which offensive players don't have any game except that, to draw fouls. I think all officials should have to play at least some ball, even pick up, as part of their training. Some things can only be understood from inside the game. I think verticality is one of them.....been a pet peeve of mine for decades.

SCMatt33
12-06-2018, 03:39 PM
Could be that he was within the restricted area, in which case verticality is irrelevant.

I know the play in question was already addressed, but I wanted to address this point as it was subject to a rule change from last year (maybe 2 years ago now). First, and this part isn’t new, the restricted arc does not matter for primary defenders, so any player who has established legal guarding position on an offensive players (there are some other nuances here for offensive rebound and odd man fast breaks, but we’ll leave those alone for now). The new rule is that secondary defenders are entitled to verticality even in the restricted arc, but they must be making an attempt to block the shot, so not just standing there with your hands up or trying to take a charge. Also, as mentioned by others, verticality not only refers to body position, but staying in the cylinder above the original position for secondary defenders.

hallcity
12-06-2018, 03:45 PM
Tyler Hansbrough made a living jumping into defenders and almost always got the call on the defender. It shouldn't be the way it's called but it is.

weezie
12-06-2018, 03:46 PM
I know the play in question was already addressed, but I wanted to address this point as it was subject to a rule change from last year (maybe 2 years ago now). First, and this part isn’t new, the restricted arc does not matter for primary defenders, so any player who has established legal guarding position on an offensive players (there are some other nuances here for offensive rebound and odd man fast breaks, but we’ll leave those alone for now). The new rule is that secondary defenders are entitled to verticality even in the restricted arc, but they must be making an attempt to block the shot, so not just standing there with your hands up or trying to take a charge. Also, as mentioned by others, verticality not only refers to body position, but staying in the cylinder above the original position for secondary defenders.


Props to SCMatt, already more analysis and thought than Roger Ayers puts into the call.