04 October, 2022
14 May, 2023
12/12/2022
Tough Calls
to read

Tough Calls - Week 8

MIES (Switzerland) - Each week, experts are analyzing the games. In order to improve the understanding of referees' decisions and to increase the transparency towards our fans, we publish some of those "tough calls", together with an explanation.

Tough Call 1: Galatasaray Nef vs Filou Oostende - Offensive Foul

Yellow 6 is dribbling the ball being guarded by Red 61. A contact occurs and the referee calls an offensive foul to Yellow 6.

Article 33.14: Holding is illegal personal contact with an opponent that interferes with his/her freedom of movement. This contact (holding) can occur with any part of the body.

Outcome: Correct decision from the referees. Red 61 was legally guarding the dribbler and Yellow 6 grabbed Red 61’s arm, thus creating an illegal contact.

 

Tough Call 2: Hapoel Atsmon Holon vs. Legia Warszawa - Travelling

White 1 drives towards the opponents’ basket, ends his dribble and makes a lay-up. The referee calls a travelling violation.

Article 25.2.1:  A player may not touch the court consecutively with the same foot or both
feet after ending his/her dribble or gaining control of the ball.

Outcome: Correct decision from the referees. White 1 ends his dribble catching the ball with his left foot on the floor. Then he jumped off that foot and put it again on the floor. This is a travelling violation.

 

Tough Call 3: BAXI Manresa vs Limoges CSP - Head Coach’s Challenge

The ball goes out-of-bounds and the referees understand that the last player who touched the ball on the court was Red 4 and award a throw-in to the Yellow team. Red team Head Coach requests a Head Coach’s Challenge.

F.3.2  The following game situations may be reviewed when the game clock shows 2:00 minutes or less in the fourth quarter and in each overtime:

  • to identify the player who has caused the ball to go out-of-bounds.

F.4.2  The time restrictions within Appendix F.3 do not apply. The head coach’s
challenge may be requested at any time in the game

F.2.3 The initial decision of the referee(s) can be corrected only if the review provides the referees with clear and conclusive visual evidence for the correction.

Outcome:  Correct procedure from the referees. The referees can only use the IRS to review who was the last player who touched the ball  before it went out-of-bounds during the last 2 minutes of the 4th quarter or overtime. However, this restriction does not apply when it is a Head Coach´s Challenge. After the review, the referees could not find conclusive evidence to change the initial decision, so it remains unchanged.

 

Tough Call 4: S.L. Benfica vs. VEF Riga - Head Coach’s Challenge

The ball goes out-of-bounds and the referees understand that the last player who touched the ball on the court was White 12 and award a throw-in to the Black team. White team Head Coach requests a Head Coach’s Challenge.

F.3.2  The following game situations may be reviewed when the game clock shows 2:00 minutes or less in the fourth quarter and in each overtime:

  • to identify the player who has caused the ball to go out-of-bounds.

F.4.2 The time restrictions within Appendix F.3 do not apply. The head coach’s
challenge may be requested at any time in the game

Outcome:  The referees can only use the IRS to review who was the last player who touched the ball  before it went out-of-bounds during the last 2 minutes of the 4th quarter or overtime. However, this restriction does not apply when it is a Head Coach´s Challenge. After the review, the referees found conclusive evidence that it was Black 15 the last who touched the ball. The initial incorrect decision was corrected after the Head Coach’s Challenge.

 

Tough Call 5: Pinar Karsiyaka vs Telekom Baskets Bonn - Backcourt Violation

White 33 passes the ball towards the centre line to his teammate White 24, who jumps and touches the ball in the air. The referee calls a backcourt violation.

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 his/her frontcourt and the ball is then first touched by a player of that team:
• Who has part of his/her body in contact with the backcourt, or
• After the ball has touched the backcourt of that team.

Article 11.1  The location of a player is determined by where he/she is touching the floor.
While he/she is airborne, he/she retains the same status he/she had when he/she last touched the floor.

Outcome: Incorrect decision from the referees. The White team had the control of the ball in their frontcourt, but none of the 2 possible conditions for a backcourt violation occurred. White 24 jumped from his frontcourt, the ball never touched the White team’s backcourt and White 24 touched the ball while airborne, so he is considered to be still in his frontcourt. Legal play.

 

Tough Call 6: SIG Strabourg vs UCAM Murcia - Foul in the Act of Shooting

White 0 is dribbling the ball and attempts a 3 point shot near the end of the shot clock period. A contact occurs and the referee calls a foul in the act on shooting to Blue 11.

Art. 15.1.3  The act of shooting in a continuous movement on a drive to the basket or other moving shot starts when the ball has come to rest in the player’s hand(s), upon completion of a dribble or a catch in the air and the player begins, in the judgment of the referee, the shooting motion preceding the release of the ball for a goal

Outcome: Correct decision from the referees. When Blue 11 contacted White 0, this player had the ball in his hands and had started the motion to shoot preceding the release of the ball. White 0 shall attempt 3 free throws.