Its called the "Rip through rule", unless the team is in the penalty its NOT a shooting foul as the offensive player is not , YET, in his (NBA) shooting motion. I tried to attach the video of the rule but failed.
Here’s the rub. It’s still a foul on the defender, and it’s not a shooting foul only “if the offensive player has not started his shooting motion.” Top NBA players like Durant, Curry, Irving and others are so good they are capable of initiating a “rip through” while shooting, sometimes knocking down the shot and earning an “and one.” You see it every night in the NBA.
Like all fouls it's up to the discretion of the ref.
Help me out here. We are in agreement that a rip through when the offensive player is determined to be in a shooting motion is in fact a shooting foul, and that it’s up to the refs to determine if the offensive player was in fact in a shooting motion???
From what I read, swinging your arms up ( in the NBA) is not the shooting motion until your reach the apex to shoot. The arms are moving into the actual shot. Now its also a very close call that I am sure causes much discussion and controversy, aka a "catch" in the NFL comes to mind.
Its also like a pump fake is not a shot either
I’ll take that as a “Yes.”
To repeat, "initiating contact" is not the rulebook criterion for determining who has committed a foul. As previously illustrated, if one player (either offensive or defensive) initiates contact with another player's extended arms or legs, it is a foul on other player, because that other player does not have a right to be in the space occupied by her extended arms or legs. Even if that player is as still as a statue, if her arms are extended beyond the vertical and contact occurs (never mind who initiated it), she has committed a foul.
I have no problem with the KLS foul. Mine concern is more general. Does anyone on this forum think that defensive players are given a fair shake?
Actually, I think blocking fouls are called too often, and charging fouls are not called enough -- which does fit in with your theory. It seems as if a driving player has to crash into the breastbone of the defender for a charge to be called. But I have seen charging calls against UConn that I cannot justify. I remember when Napheesa fouled out of a game against South Carolina on a charging call that I could not comprehend. It was called by Joseph Vascily (sp?), who appears to be one of the better-regarded referees. If anyone remembers that play and thinks the call was justified (I think it was in the game two years ago), I would like to hear them explain why they think that was a good call.
I don't think they are when touch calls are called on the defender yet a player like Dillard can use her left forearm like a lead blocker.
No they aren't, but it's the 84-78 scores tht attracts the on the fence fans to the games, not the 52-48 defensive slugfests, i agree, it was a foul, and we'd want it called if someone did the same to Lou.
Good point but be careful what you wish for. I think Pheesa is probably one of the best at using her off forearm and not getting called for it. It could be because she does it so quickly and not maintaining her pressure for but a second. In fact I think at times she doesn't even make contact.
