MIES (Switzerland) - Experts analyze all BCL games each week. In order to improve the understanding of referees' decisions and to increase transparency towards our fans, we publish some of those tough calls, along with an explanation.

Tough Call 1: MHP RIESEN Ludwigsburg vs. Darüssafaka Lassa - Foul away from the ball

The referees call a blocking foul to Green 1 on Yellow 1 away from the ball. The ball enters the basket and the referees award 2 points to Yellow 7.

Article 10.4: The ball does not become dead and the goal counts if made when:
• The ball is in the control of a shooter for a goal who finishes his/her shot with a continuous motion which started before a foul is committed by any opponent player or on any person permitted to sit on the opponents’ team bench.

Article 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 by the referees. When Green 1 committed the foul, Yellow 7 had already started his act of shooting. He shall be awarded 2 points, and the game will be resumed with a Yellow team throw-in from the place closest to where the foul was committed and 14 seconds on the shot clock.

Tough Call 2: Pinar Karsiyaka vs. Rio Breogan - No call situation

White 0 attempts a 3-point jump shot from the corner, being guarded by Green 7. A contact occurs and the referees call a foul to Green 7.

Article 33.2: The offensive player, whether on the court or airborne, shall not cause contact with the defensive player in a legal guarding position by:
• Spreading his/her legs or arms during or immediately after a shot for a goal.

Outcome: Incorrect decision by the referees. Green 7 did not create any contact, it was the shooter who extended his leg outside of his cylinder. As the contact did not have any effect on the freedom of movement of Green 7, this is a no call situation, and the game should have continued.

Tough Call 3: Pinar Karsiyaka vs. Rio Breogan - Personal foul

White 3 drives to the basket guarded by Green 9. A contact occurs and the referees call a team control foul to White 3. The Green team Head Coach requests his Head Coach Challenge to request the foul being upgraded to unsportsmanlike foul. After the review, the referees stay with their initial decision as they could not find any visual evidence to upgrade the foul.

Article 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 his/her cylinder.

Article 33.11: If contact caused by a player in any way restricts the freedom of movement of an opponent, such contact is a foul.

Article 34.1.1: A player shall not impede the progress of an opponent by extending his/her hand, arm, elbow, shoulder, hip, leg, knee, or foot.

Outcome: First, incorrect decision by the referees. The first illegal contact was created by Green 9 with his right arm on White 3’s left arm. The second contact, created by White 3, was a reaction to the first contact created by the defender.

Then with the Head Coach Challenge, as it is not possible to change the player who was penalized with the foul, the referees had to review the foul they had called, and they found that it did not meet any of the criteria to be considered as an unsportsmanlike foul.

However, the correct decision would have been to call Green 9’s foul in the act of shooting and award 2 free throws to White 3.