MIES (Switzerland) - Experts analyze all BCL games each week. In order to improve the understanding of referees' decisions and to increase transparency, we publish some of those Tough Calls, along with an explanation.
TC1: Hapoel Netanel Holon vs. Igokea m:tel - BALL RETURNED TO THE BACKCOURT
Yellow 5 dribbles the ball in his backcourt. He steps on his frontcourt, with one foot, and passes the ball to his teammate Yellow 99. The referee calls a backcourt violation.
Art. 30.1.1: A team is in control of a live ball in its frontcourt when:
A player of that team is touching the frontcourt with both feet while holding, catching or dribbling the ball in the frontcourt, or
The ball is passed between the players of that team in the frontcourt.
Art. 30.1.2: A team in control of a live ball in the frontcourt has illegally returned the ball to its backcourt, if a player of that team is the last to touch the ball in the frontcourt and the ball is then first touched by a player of that team:
Who has part of the body in contact with the backcourt, or
After the ball has touched the backcourt of that team.
Outcome: Incorrect decision by the referee. Yellow 5 did not touch his frontcourt with both feet when he was holding the ball before the pass. Therefore, the Yellow team was never in control of the ball in its frontcourt.
TC2: ERA Nymburk vs. RASTA Vechta - UNSPORTSMANLIKE FOUL
White 2 drives to basket when a contact is created by Black 41. Both Centre and Lead referee call a defensive foul, upgraded to an Unsportsmanlike foul by the Lead referee, and mirrored by the Centre referee.
Art. 37.1.1: An unsportsmanlike foul is a player contact which is:
Contact with an opponent not legitimately attempting to directly play the ball within the spirit and intent of the rules.
Excessive, hard contact caused by a player in an effort to play the ball or an opponent.
Outcome: Correct decision by the referees. The contact created by Black 41 meets the criteria to be considered as an unsportsmanlike foul. Centre referee is primarily responsible to take the decision as he was following the primary defender, who created the illegal contact, from the start to the end of the play action.
TC3: Unicaja vs. Aliaga Petkimspor - SHOT CLOCK VIOLATION / HEAD COACH CHALLENGE
Near the end of a shot clock period, White 19 attempts a 3-point shot. Trail referee understands that the time period expired before the shot was released and calls a violation.
The White team Head Coach believes that the ball was released before the shot clock period expired and requests a Head Coach Challenge. After the IRS review, the referees award 3 points to White 19 and reset the game clock to 10.7
Art. 29.1.1: To constitute a shot for a goal within 24 seconds:
The ball must leave the player's hand(s) before the shot clock signal sounds.
Art. 29.1.2: When the backboard is equipped with yellow lighting along its perimeter at the top, the lighting takes precedence over the shot clock signal sound.
F.3.2: When the game clock shows 2:00 minutes or less in the fourth quarter and in each overtime,
whether a shot for a successful goal was released before the shot clock signal sounded.
F.4.2: The time restrictions within Appendix F.3.2 and 3.3 do not apply. The HCC may be requested at any time in the game.
Outcome: For the referees, this situation is only reviewable when the game clock shows 2:00 or less in the fourth quarter and each overtime. However, the Head Coach Challenge is not subject to the time restrictions and can be requested at any time in the game.
The initial decision by the referee was incorrect. After the review, the final decision to award the basket is correct. The game clock must be reset to the time displayed when the referee blew his whistle.
TC4: Unicaja vs. Aliaga Petkimspor - CHARGE
Green 0 receives a pass and starts a drive to the basket. A contact occurs with White 26, and the Lead referee calls a team control foul for charging with the ball.
Art.33.3: A defensive player has established an initial legal guarding position when
facing the opponent, and
having both feet on the court.
Art. 33.4: When judging a charge/block situation involving a player with the ball, a referee shall use the following principles:
The defensive player must establish an initial legal guarding position by facing the player with the ball and having both feet on the court.
The defensive player may remain stationary, jump vertically, move laterally or backwards in order to maintain the initial legal guarding position.
When moving to maintain the initial legal guarding position, one foot or both feet may be off the court for an instant, as long as the movement is lateral or backwards, but not towards the player with the ball.
Contact must occur on the torso; in which case the defensive player would be considered as having been at the place of contact first.
Having established a legal guarding position, the defensive player may turn within the cylinder to avoid injury.
In any of the above situations, the contact shall be considered as having been caused by the player with the ball.
Art.33.6: A player who has jumped into the air from a place on the court has the right to land again at the same place. He has the right to land on another place on the court provided that the landing place and the direct path between the take-off and landing place is not already occupied by an opponent(s) at the time of take-off.
An opponent may not move into the path of a player, after that player, has jumped into the air.
Outcome: Correct decision. White 26 had already established a legal guarding position on a free spot when Green 0 jumped off the floor. Then, the contact occurred on his torso. Lead referee is primary responsible for this decision as he was following the help defender’s movement from the start to the end of the play action.
TC5: Manisa Basket vs. Peristeri Domino's - FOUL IN THE ACT OF SHOOTING
Near the end of the game, the blue team take a throw-in from behind his opponents’ endline. Blue 5 receives the ball, steps back and attempts a 3-point shot. The referees do not call any foul. As a consequence of his complaints, Blue 5 receives his second technical foul in the game and, therefore, is game disqualified.
Art. 33.1: The defensive player may not enter the cylinder of the offensive player with the ball and cause an illegal contact when the offensive player is attempting a normal basketball play within the cylinder. The boundaries of the cylinder of the offensive player with the ball are:
The front by the feet, bent knees and arms, holding the ball above the hips,
The rear by the buttocks, and
The sides by the outer edge of elbows and legs.
Art. 33.2: During the game, each player has the right to occupy any position (cylinder) on the court not already occupied by an opponent.
This principle protects the space on the court which the player occupies and the space above when jumping vertically within that space.
When the player leaves the vertical position (cylinder) and body contact occurs with an opponent who had already established that player’s own vertical position (cylinder), the player who left the vertical position (cylinder) is responsible for the contact.
Outcome: Incorrect decision by the referees. White 99 jumped to try to block the shot and landed without creating any contact on the shooter. However, then White 99 moved forward, invading Blue 5 cylinder, who jumped vertically within his own cylinder to shoot, before his shooting action had finished. This is a foul in the act of shooting and Blue 5 should have been awarded 3 free throws.