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.
In view of better understanding of the new rules, we are reviewing the Tough Calls from the BCL Qualification Round Tournaments, held in Samokov, Bulgaria in September.
TC1: Biotekno Korfez Basket vs. Kolossos H Hotels BC - Flagrant Foul
White #77 attempts a three-point jump shot. During White #77’s landing contact occurs with Blue #9’s foot.
The referee calls a foul in the act of shooting and award three free throws to White #77. After briefly consulting with the other officials, the calling referee is unsure whether the contact meets the criteria for a flagrant foul and decides to use the IRS.
After the IRS review, the foul was upgraded to a flagrant foul.
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.
Art. 38.1.1: A flagrant foul is a player’s illegal contact with an opponent, which violates the spirit of sportsmanship and fair play, and by its nature and/or the severity level exceeds the limits of a personal or disruptive foul.
The criteria for flagrant fouls are the following:
Reckless, violent or dangerous act, which causes or may cause injury to an opponent.
Outcome: Initial incorrect decision that was corrected after the IRS review.
Blue #9’s second action - taking an additional step with his left foot towards the shooter’s landing spot - is a reckless close-out.
It must be considered a reckless and dangerous close-out that may cause injury to White #77, violating the airborne player’s right to land on a spot that was not occupied when the shooter took off.
The game shall be resumed with three free throws for White #77, followed by a White team throw-in from the throw-in line in their frontcourt, opposite the scorers’ table.
TC2: SL Benfica vs. Lions de Geneve - Landing Foul
Red #1 attempts a three-point shot while White #14 tries to block the shot. The ball does not enter the basket.
While landing, contact occurs with White #14’s foot. The referee calls a foul by White #14 on the shooter and awards three free throws to Red #1.
Article 34.1.1: A personal foul is a player’s illegal contact with an opponent. If the foul is committed against a player in the unsuccessful act of shooting, that player shall be awarded 3 free throws.
Outcome: Correct decision by the referee. White 14 trying to block the shot is a normal basketball play. White 14's contact with Red 1 did not meet the criteria for a flagrant foul. Red 1 shall attempt 3 free throws. The game shall be resumed as after any last free throw.
TC3: Promitheas Patras BC vs. RASTA Vechta - Flagrant Foul
White #4 scores a three-point shot. After the ball passes through the net, Black #5 pushes White #14, and the referee calls a personal foul.
After briefly consulting with another referee, the officials are unsure whether the illegal contact meets the criteria for a flagrant foul, so they decide to use the IRS.
After the review, the foul is upgraded to a flagrant foul. Art. 38.1.1: A flagrant foul is a player’s illegal contact with an opponent, which violates the spirit of sportsmanship and fair play, and by its nature and/or the severity level exceeds the limits of a personal or disruptive foul. The criteria for flagrant fouls are the following:
Not a legitimate basketball play against an opponent, with or without a ball.
Outcome: Initial incorrect decision that was corrected after the IRS review. The contact initiated by Black #5 is not a legitimate basketball play.
The game shall be resumed with two free throws for White #14, followed by a White team throw-in from the throw-in line in their frontcourt, opposite the scorers’ table.