An Australian basketball forum covering NBL, WNBL, ABL, Juniors plus NBA, WNBA, NZ, Europe, etc | Forum time is: 4:47 pm, Mon 22 Dec 2014 | Posts: 528,526 | Last 7 days: 674

Dunk Basketball Uniforms   Plus 2 Clothing is an Australian owned and operated street-wear specialist. Tall clothing designed by tall people.

hoopie
Last year

#30600

Flop or foul?

With all the discussion about penalising flopping, I haven't seen anyone mention what caused it.

Most flops are caused when an attacker hits a stationary defender, and that person falls over.

If the defender had good position then the attacker caused contact and so the attacker should be penalised under the rules of the game, not the defender for falling over.

Or is this just more of the old argument about referees using their judgement rather than sticking to the rules, in order to keep the game flowing?

Report this topic


 

x
Last year
08:36 22 Jan 13

Reply #400090

re: Flop or foul?

If there is legitimate contact then it's not a flop...


Report this post



Anonymous
Last year
08:39 22 Jan 13

Reply #400093

re: Flop or foul?

Firstly not all contact is a foul.

Secondly we are talking in most cases that the contact is not sufficient to knock the defender over, so in order to win a foul the defender falls to the floor to try and con the referee into making a call in their favour. The referees are instructed to look to see if the offensive player breaks the plain of the defender. This gives an indication that the offensive player has made sufficient contact.

So the referees are looking to see if the offensive player ends up over the top of the fallen defender. Or their momentum continues forward after contact. An example is the offensive player spinning on the defender, there maybe contact but in most cases the offensive player spins away from the defender, the defender feels contact and "puts" themselves to the floor.

The rules define it as "Falling down to fake a foul".


Report this post



Anonymous
Last year
09:19 22 Jan 13

Reply #400105

re: Flop or foul?

As stated in the rules X "falling down to fake a foul". You can classify this as trying to "sell" a call also.

No one is saying that if contact is made to an off-balance defender that if that defender falls over that it is a flop. We are talking about players deliberately putting themselves to the floor in order to try and con the refs into making a call.


Report this post



,
Last year
10:31 22 Jan 13

Reply #400115

re: Flop or foul?

Are they in the no charge area under the basket?


Report this post



Anonymous
Last year
10:41 22 Jan 13

Reply #400117

re: Flop or foul?

The NCZ has it's own parameters, but they revolve around a defender being in a legal guarding position within the zone. Regardless of whether a defender is within the no charge zone if they are not in a legal guarding position it is still a block.

It is a no CHARGE zone not a no block zone so the emphasis is on the defender to be in a legal guarding position.


Report this post



Anonymous
Last year
10:44 22 Jan 13

Reply #400118

re: Flop or foul?

9 times out of 10 a "flopper" is placing the defensive team at a disadvantage anyway, i'm not sure i agree that it warrants a tech, the fact that he's now placed his team in a 4 on 5 situation is a penalty in itself.


Report this post



Anonymous
Last year
11:14 22 Jan 13

Reply #400121

re: Flop or foul?

I think the problem stems from the fact that it makes it difficult for the referees to adjudicate. I think a pertinent point to remember is it's easier to see from in the stands. I dont say this in a smart ass way but in the way that the fan seated in the stands is generally elevated and doesnt have to deal with the problem of being obstructed by a player. They have better vision to see the whole play compared to a referee who is on the floor, 5 feet from the action, with 10 moving players etc. Thus as stated by "X" if there is legitimate contact that isnt illegal and the player goes to the floor it makes it very difficult for the referee to adjudicate "flop" "charge" "block""no-call". Thus FIBA (based in Europe where flopping was a few years ago at an epidemic, you just have to watch players like Navarro and Teodosić who flop both at the defensive and offensive end) have tried to discourage flopping in a similar manner to the way FIFA have. FIBA dont have yellow cards etc so they chose a technical foul to try and discourage the practice.


Report this post



Jason
Last year
12:17 22 Jan 13

Reply #400141

re: Flop or foul?

I think something else that is missed is that just because the defender doesn't fall over, doesn't mean its not a charge either.

If a small player goes barrelling into a bigger player who doesn't fall over (purely because he is big enough to take the hit), it should still be a charge. I never see these calls. In fact usually the bigger defender gets called for a defensive foul.


Report this post



hoopie
Last year
12:24 22 Jan 13

Reply #400146

re: Flop or foul?

Agree, Jason, and that's where 'referee interpretation' becomes such an issue, instead of just sticking to the rules.


Report this post



Anonymous
Last year
12:30 22 Jan 13

Reply #400149

re: Flop or foul?

You also have to apply "advantage/Disadvantage" to the situation: did the offense create themselves an advantage or put the defense at a disadvantage from the contact.?
If neither an advantage or disadvantage was created for either player then its a No Call.


Report this post



Anonymous
Last year
12:38 22 Jan 13

Reply #400152

re: Flop or foul?

Advantage/disadvantage comes down to Breaking the plain doesnt it? If the offensive player breaks the defenders plain and knocks him over or displaces him (reference to the above little player running into a bigger player) then clearly it is putting the defender at a disadvantage as he is entitled to that spot on the floor if he got there first and was legal.

But if the contact is minimal and the defender buckles and puts himself/herself to the floor then that is a different story.


Report this post



Bucketman
Last year
13:03 22 Jan 13

Reply #400160

re: Flop or foul?

People who flop to gain an advantage for their team, in my opinion, are cheats. They are applying an action that does not proportionally match the force in the contact. Ask any player that plays against or even with a flopper, it's not an admired attribute. They serve to frustrate the offensive player and team who's purpose is score or create offensive. But as a team mate of a flopper, it also frustrates and embarrasses because no one wants to be associated with a cheat. Getting a tech is light IMO. Integrity and faking arnt words usually used in the same sentence. For cheating, you should get a yellow card. Reoffend, red card and have a week off to think about how good flopping is for the game.


Report this post



Ricey
Last year
15:05 22 Jan 13

Reply #400184

re: Flop or foul?

flopping occurs 90% of the time as a result of no ref having the brains to realise that you don't have to end on your ass for it to be a charge.. if refs called games correctly then it wouldn't happen as much


Report this post



Anonymous
Last year
15:28 22 Jan 13

Reply #400189

re: Flop or foul?

Yeah that's right Ricey the refs across the entire world are hopeless crap and it's all there fault!

^clueless


Report this post



hoopie
Last year
16:01 22 Jan 13

Reply #400200

re: Flop or foul?

So if Seth Scott takes a dribble into Luke Schenscher and pushes him back a step, and then does it a few more times in order to get close to the basket, then who would consider that legal or say that the refs are doing their job by not calling it?

Seth would be causing contact, would be breaking Luke's plane, and would be putting Luke at a disadvantage. Doesn't sound legal to me.

So why is it allowed so much in the NBL and NBA?


Report this post



Anonymous
Last year
16:07 22 Jan 13

Reply #400201

re: Flop or foul?

Luke is allowed to maintain his position by using a legal single arm bar. Which is more often the case in low post play. What occurs again more often is the defender chooses not to play defense, feels the contact and falls to the floor!

But there are definitely times in both leagues where it should be called but isnt. I'm guessing it's for flow as has be alluded to above talking about advantage/disadvantage


Report this post



Saudi
Last year
17:47 22 Jan 13

Reply #400233

re: Flop or foul?

In a flop/charge situatipn, was told to look and see if the head leads or follows the body. As the head is so heavy, it will trail the body in a genuine hit, or lead the body if the player is trying to magnify the contact. It's a good indication IMO


Report this post



POP
Last year
12:24 23 Jan 13

Reply #400375

re: Flop or foul?

It's not necessarily the officials' fault, but they - & those coaching/directing them - are part of the issue.

Relying more on the rules, which are designed to ensure the game is played on an 'even footing', with a fair balance between offence & defence, with players using their skills and abilities rather than brute strength, would go a long way to addressing the issue, which is far more complex than 'flopping'.

At present it seems every change in approach requires officials to make yet another subjective assessment. They not only have to see the hold, push or whatever, but decide whether it has an 'effect'. It's hard enough to see and react to illegal actions without having to guess at what effect each one might or might not have. This in fact not only makes it hard for officials to make decisions, it has the effect of discouraging them from making calls [it's too hard!]. It also provides a ready excuse for any no-call, wrong or right.

Every illegal physical action does have an effect - a physical impact on the recipient - even if there is no immediate direct gain or benefit [like a turn-over or missed shot].

Every no-call on an illegal action has a direct impact on the game because it means the player not called stays in the game long after his [or her] fifth foul. The five-foul limit is there to ensure players who use illegal/unfair measures don't stay in the game!

To go to the complexity ... falling over on contact is far from the only issue.

What about the guard who throws his head & 'off' arm up as he drives past a defender? He's clearly trying to convince the officials he was contacted, whether or not he was. Might not be 'flopping', but he is trying to gain an unfair advantage by deceiving the referees. This is not a hypothetical.

And just to put the argument in context - what about the player driving to the basket who dips his or her shoulder into a defender, who is in legal position travelling parallel to him/her? The attacking player makes the contact but, when a call is made, the defender invariably gets the foul.

Guess that in some ways that's a parallel with the post player driving into the defender. I'm pretty sure failure to call that [charges in post clashes] is a major contributing factor to the holding and 'arms around' defence we see so much of in 'low post' situations in particular. It's the defender's way of trying to 'level the playing field'. Stop the charging and you remove the excuse/reason for that sort of 'defence' - if that's what you call it.

As I said - not simple!


Report this post



Jason
Last year
12:25 24 Jan 13

Reply #400562

re: Flop or foul?

As has been said on previous posts, the game should just be called as it is seen in line with the rules.

There should be no need for the advantage/disadvantage rubbish or evening up foul counts etc.

If I get hit and no foul is called than I would argue that I have already been disadvataged even if there is no obvious advatage in the play. The player has broken the rules. The player may avoid being fouled off later in the game because of this no-call. That's a pretty big advantage if you ask me.

Also a foul being called would otherwise lead to foul shots or a side possession - usually better alternatives than continuing play after being hit. Thus, the team is disadvantaged by the no-call.

In my opinion, a foul (or any other violation) anywhere on the court, in any situation should be called as it is a breach of the rules and the player and their team should be appropriately penalised.

The only time I would use the advantage rule is if the violation is stopping an open layup.


Report this post



Anonymous
Last year
15:28 24 Jan 13

Reply #400594

re: Flop or foul?

Jason

"As has been said on previous posts, the game should just be called as it is seen in line with the rules."

I'm afraid mate Advantage /Disadvantage is written in the rules....

47.3 When deciding on a personal contact or violation, the officials shall, in each instance, have regard to and weigh the following fundamental principles:
• The spirit and intent of the rules and the need to uphold the integrity of the game.
• Consistency in application of the concept of 'advantage/disadvantage'. The officials should not seek to interrupt the flow of the game unnecessarily in order to penalise incidental personal contact which does not give the player responsible an advantage nor place his opponent at a disadvantage.
• Consistency in the application of common sense to each game, bearing in mind the abilities of the players concerned and their attitude and conduct during the game.
• Consistency in the maintenance of a balance between game control and game flow, having a 'feeling' for what the participants are trying to do and calling what is right for the game.


And the words "have to regard and weigh the following FUNDAMENTAL principles..."

Lends itself to being a rather import element of calling the game in accordance with the RULES as written.


Report this post



POP
Last year
17:55 24 Jan 13

Reply #400629

re: Flop or foul?

And the first [& I assume primary] 'fundamental principle' is

• The spirit and intent of the rules and the need to uphold the integrity of the game.

That, surely, is the crux of the issue.

There is so much subjectivity that it seems to me the primary objective - and so the primary respopnsibility of the officials - of upholding the spirit and intent of the rules and the integrity of the game has been almost completely lost sight of.

To put it succinctly & colloquially; we've lost the plot.

The game is in need of a good dose of objectivity [the letter of the rules, in this case] to balance what has [obviously to me] become an excessive reliance on the subjective personal opinions of the officials.


Report this post



Anonymous
Last year
07:00 25 Jan 13

Reply #400662

re: Flop or foul?

There are a few issues that have crept into the game of recent times.
The Referee's are now suffering for paralysis from analysis combined with evaluators who have wildly varying takes on the game.
What one evaluator will crucify a Ref for another will commend them.
Until they can get the evaluators to agree on the way forward and on the same page with regards to how to asses situations the Refs will continue to second guess themselves.


Report this post



hoopie
Last year
07:22 25 Jan 13

Reply #400665

re: Flop or foul?

"The officials should not seek to interrupt the flow of the game unnecessarily in order to penalise incidental personal contact"

The sh.t I'm annoyed by is way beyond incidental contact! Incidental contact is brushing past someone, and I'd never want that called.

What gets my goat is the intentional hard contact. A dribbler charging at the defender's hip will usually get a blocking foul, even if the defender had position and didn't move. A low-post player slamming into a defender to move him back a metre. A rebounder pushing someone sideways to get him out of the way. Sticking the bum out when setting a screen, just to make the defender's job harder. Holding the attacker as he's going round you.

I'm with you, POP


Report this post



Jason
Last year
09:00 25 Jan 13

Reply #400675

re: Flop or foul?

No wonder the refs have so much trouble given the rules they have to enforce.

I agree with Pop and hoopie


Report this post



Anonymous
Last year
09:02 25 Jan 13

Reply #400676

re: Flop or foul?

Who do you want the foul called on when the dribbler charges into a defenders hip that was when he was in a legal guarding position and hasnt moved?


Report this post



hoopie
Last year
10:06 25 Jan 13

Reply #400688

re: Flop or foul?

Charging into the hip of the defender who had good position early enough?

Whoever initiated the contact and hadn't established position or direction early enough, in this case the attacker.


Report this post



Anonymous
Last year
11:33 25 Jan 13

Reply #400708

re: Flop or foul?

Hoopie, the rule states:

Contact must occur on the torso, in which case the defensive player would be considered as having been at the place of contact first.

In this case the hip is not the torso hence why when the defender defending the on ball screener "SHOWS" and the ball handler dives at the defender it SHOULD be a no call. Yes I agree with you it is called and called against Schensher ALOT. but by rule it shouldnt be a call.


Report this post





 

Reply to this topic

Name Email

Random name suggestion for anonymous posters: Dione 59

Title
Rules: You must read the Terms of Use. No spam, no offensive material, no sniping at other clubs, no 'who cares?'-type comments, no naming or bashing under 18 players.
Message

Please proof-read your post before submitting as you will not be able to edit it afterwards.
 


Aussie Basketball Travellers
Goalrilla basketball hoops
Dennis Rodman - Raw and uncensored

Recent Posts

.
.