The Phantom Foul

[RaineyDevil]

Do the refs think they need to call a foul everytime someone drives to the basket...whether the person gets touched or not? This is something that needs to be evaluated in the ref training programs.

[Lord Ash]

Hm, difficult to say. It can also go the other way, when a ref swallows a whistle at an important juncture and it changes a game. Hm... let me see if I can think of an example... ah, got it! Maybe, like, when future NBA All-Star Carlos Boozer gets a rebound and gets fouled making a layup, but they don't call it because there is only a few seconds left?

It is a shame that refs are human. I wish they would hurry up with inventing robot refs.

[CameronBornAndBred]

Do the refs think they need to call a foul everytime someone drives to the basket...whether the person gets touched or not? This is something that needs to be evaluated in the ref training programs.

I agree with LA that it can go the other way. I've seen scrums under the basket where basically 10 bodies are battling for rebounds and putbacks, and no fouls are called. It goes against the laws of physics that a shooter is not fouled in those situations. I would never want to be a ref.

[ncexnyc]

I agree with LA that it can go the other way. I've seen scrums under the basket where basically 10 bodies are battling for rebounds and putbacks, and no fouls are called. It goes against the laws of physics that a shooter is not fouled in those situations. I would never want to be a ref.

Like the Carolina game last night, where McGowan was surrounded by 4 Heels battling for a rebound and he missed two shots will those 4 Heels wailing away at the ball.

[calltheobvious]

Do the refs think they need to call a foul everytime someone drives to the basket...whether the person gets touched or not? This is something that needs to be evaluated in the ref training programs.

On the first question: No.
As to the second and overall points, what are you talking about?

[CameronBornAndBred]

A. No.
B. What are you talking about?

He's talking about a common occurance where a shooter drives to the basket untouched (in replays it's obvous) and the ref whistles the closest player. It happens lots, and as we say above it can happen the exact opposite. It's what drives fans to question that a team is getting favored treatment.

[RaineyDevil]

On the first question: No.
As to the second and overall points, what are you talking about?

?? Have you not ever seen an old fashioned 3 point play where the shooter got fouled by no one and yet they still blow a whistle?

I was referring to mainly fast break situations where the defender is trailing and doesnt really do anything and still gets blown for a foul. I see your points on the other end of the spectrum, that situation hadn't really crossed my mind, but you are right there are a lot of put backs and close proiximity shots that do seemed to go un-called. So I guess it goes both ways. Just hope they go all Duke's way!

[calltheobvious]

?? Have you not ever seen an old fashioned 3 point play where the shooter got fouled by no one and yet they still blow a whistle?

I was referring to mainly fast break situations where the defender is trailing and doesnt really do anything and still gets blown for a foul. I see your points on the other end of the spectrum, that situation hadn't really crossed my mind, but you are right there are a lot of put backs and close proiximity shots that do seemed to go un-called. So I guess it goes both ways. Just hope they go all Duke's way!

Sure I've seen such plays. And I appreciate your acknowledgment of the availability bias that goes on in thinking about such plays. Far more often than not, plays on the break are called correctly. But when the whistle blows, two things happen that almost never happen with a no-call: you see a replay, and you continue to think about the play. These two factors are what cause the occasional miss to stick with you longer than the correctly officiated calls or no-calls.