Monday 24 September 2018

1

Register to read more ...

Comments  

#31 KORALEWSKI Bartosz 2017-09-13 21:59
Unsportsmanlike foul. According to the new rules. The ofensive player don't want to play the ball. He want only to stop fastbreake. UF!
#30 SORGO Markus 2017-09-13 20:53
According to the new rules this is an UF!
Good help from new lead although he is not responsible and should have let the call to center or trail
#29 MOSER Silvia 2017-09-13 20:52
Unsportsmanlike Foul - C3
#28 POGON Michał 2017-09-13 19:42
No call, contact has no influnece on RSBQ..
#27 FABER Bruno 2017-09-13 17:51
Good call unsportsmanlike foul for white player
#26 TYBOR Tomasz 2017-09-13 14:44
I would like to learn on the camp, whether or not the philosophy has changed since last year, but now I call this type of contact as 'no call', because the RSBQ was not impacted.
#25 KUZIA Michał 2017-09-13 12:03
In my opinion this contact doesn't influence RSBQ of the dribbler. No call
#24 CIEŚLA Michał 2017-09-13 09:31
UF for stoping transition - C3 - An unnecessary contact caused by defensive player in order to stop the progress of the offensive team in transition. C primary
#23 JENNINGS Matthew 2017-09-13 09:15
UF as per the new rules, fouled to stop transition.
#22 AL-KHUSAIBI Ahmed 2017-09-13 06:49
Unsportsmanlike foul.

- New Rule 2017 - is an unsprotsmanlike foul
#21 VEIS Martin 2017-09-12 22:44
Small contact don´t affect the fastbreak - for me NO CALL with primary competence C! If call this should be definitely UF with new rules in this season - unnecessary contact to stop the transition.
#20 BELKNER Alexandra 2017-09-12 22:43
USF, according to the new rules criteria.
#19 GRIFFIN David 2017-09-12 22:28
New Rule - is an unsprotsmanlike foul in order to prevent the offensive team progressing up the court in transition.
#18 JASAITIS Andrius 2017-09-12 20:59
I think last season would be rsbq rule applied for this call, but from this season probably most of the times will be a uf foul.
Small contact not really affected offensive player, but none devfensive move and trying to catch player with extended arms.
#17 MORINA Edon 2017-09-12 19:47
Very interesting to discuss i think. I think, this call depends on the criteria of the game. Just to have no-call due to better game flow in fastbreak for the spectators is not a criteria. I agree that if we call something, it should be U-foul, because the criteria for it is there = C1. In the end I would probably have had a no call. Lead should stay out from this play - center call.
#16 KONOPACKI Tomasz 2017-09-12 19:01
has no influence on a RSBQ player with the ball. Imo no call
#15 KRYŚKO Mateusz 2017-09-12 18:39
I think we should leave this contact without any call. It was "mosquito" contact which has no influence on a RSBQ player with the ball.
#14 VAVROVA Veronika 2017-09-12 17:54
No call and not for L. This is for C and T could help.
#13 STAMATIOU Asimina 2017-09-12 14:17
According to new rules (C3), this is an unsportsmanlike foul. It’s Center’s primary. However, Center’s view is blocked by another offensive player so good help call from Lead.
#12 PACEK Paweł 2017-09-12 08:27
No call. Defender play didn't change anything in RSBQ.
#11 OBERTOVA Veronika 2017-09-12 07:42
As Robert Cibulka says no call.
#10 RUBACH Anja 2017-09-12 06:30
No call because contact was small and did not affect the offenders movement (no disadvantage). According to new criteria it is a U if you make a call "unneccessary contact to stop the transition". Lead should not call. The foul is for C or T to call.
#9 KUZIA Bogna 2017-09-12 06:24
An unnecessary contact caused by defensive player in order to stop the progress of the offensive team in transition. Unsportsmanlike foul.
#8 KOSTRZYŃSKI Marcin 2017-09-11 21:58
C3- UF for stoping transition, (reaching a cross the player where you not anywhere near the ball) C primary AOR, good help from new L
#7 KRICKOVA Lenka 2017-09-11 20:50
No call because the contact didn't affect offender's movement. In a fast break situation like this one, C should be responsible for the call, not L.
#6 VANGLOVSKIJ Michail 2017-09-11 20:11
I agree with CIBULKA ROBERT

No Call
#5 CIBULKA Robert 2017-09-11 17:30
According to RSBQ rule, offensive player didn´t lose his speed or balance and either there were 3 on 1 player situation ( fast brake)

MY CALL: NO CALL
#4 SCHOLZE Michal 2017-09-11 15:51
No call for me. While it could be explained as UF using the new criteria "unneccessary contact to stop the transition", the contact seems very small to me and doesn't affect the player with the ball. Also C has primary on this play and doesn't blow the whistle. New L is running away looking over his shoulder, but this is not his play to call.
#3 FOUDHAILI Radhouen 2017-09-11 11:00
Good UF. Defender has no chance to play the ball he was trying to stop the fastbreak.
The new lead was lucky here there was a foul just in front of him, in my opinion this is C primary as the new lead should be running towards the end line and get ready to receive the play and leave it to the C or T.
It was the right call. C didn't call it. The right call comes before the mechanics.
#2 DĘBOWSKI Maciej 2017-09-11 09:57
In my opinion it shouldn't be called. Offensive player doesn't loose his RSBQ after the contact, so there is a big chance for a nice fastbreak. Probably it would be better for the game and the spectators, so it should be considered by the ref.
#1 PIETRAKIEWICZ Michał 2017-09-11 07:01
Unsportsmanlike foul. According to the new rules and interpetation from last year. "An unnecessary contact caused by the defensive player in order to stop the progress of the offensive team in transition". If there is a slightly contact (no U) I think we can continue a play but in this case - unsportsmanlike foul. Lead have a good point of view for this play.

You have no rights to post comments