Rule of Verticality

Rule of Verticality

Postby z32 on Sun Jan 13, 2008 10:21 pm

VERTICALITY-Verticality applies to a legal position. The basic components of the principle of verticality are:
Legal guarding position must be established and attained initially, and movement thereafter must be legal;
From this position, the defender may rise or jump vertically and occupy the space within his or her vertical plane;
The hands and arms of the defender may be raised within his or her vertical plane while the defender is on the floor or in the air;
The defender should not be penalized for leaving the floor vertically or having his or her hands and arms extended within the vertical plane;
The offensive player whether on the floor or airborne may not clear out or cause contact that is a foul;
The defender may not "belly up" or use the lower part of the body or arms to cause contact that is a foul outside his or her vertical plane.

http://www.hoopsvibe.com/basketball-coaching/basketball-rules/basketball-rules---definitions-ar419.html

That last play of the game really made me question exactly what the Rule of Verticality is. According to this definition, the important part bolded which really affects that play, the defender is allowed his vertical space if he has already established it, and doesn't need to have his hands or arms in a certain position, as long as they don't encroach horizontally towards the opposing player.

Now, I've looked at the replay a lot of times now, and I believe that the right non-call was made, based on the details of the verticality rule. Kwame had CLEARLY established himself inside the paint and thereby is allowed his own vertical space to move in. The real issue comes with his left hand which makes contact with Lowry's body. According to the rule though, Kwame is allowed any movement in his vertical space, as long as he does NOT initiate the contact with the player. The replay CLEARLY shows Lowry jumping INTO Kwame, and Kwame merely staying his ground and jumping STRAIGHT up, which he is allowed. His left hand does NOT move forward to initiate the contact with Lowry, but was merely used to shield him from Lowry.

I just felt this needed clarification since it was the single most important play of the game. Hope it eases some people's minds that it was a legit non-call, albeit, a TOUGH one to judge.
Last edited by z32 on Sun Jan 13, 2008 10:27 pm, edited 3 times in total.
User avatar
z32

 
Posts: 4987
Joined: Sun Apr 23, 2006 12:20 pm
Location: Santa Clarita

Postby John3:16 on Sun Jan 13, 2008 10:22 pm

We got lucky on that non-call, but the refs are known to leave it up to the players in the last minute.
Image
User avatar
John3:16

 
Posts: 31308
Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2004 12:23 am
Location: Anywhere but LD after a loss.

Postby z32 on Sun Jan 13, 2008 10:28 pm

Yea, it was indeed a VERY hard moment to judge, but I believe it was the right non-call.
User avatar
z32

 
Posts: 4987
Joined: Sun Apr 23, 2006 12:20 pm
Location: Santa Clarita

Postby lakerzkb8 on Sun Jan 13, 2008 10:29 pm

Oh well, run to the lockers and move on :mhihi:
This game's in the refrigerator: the door is closed, the lights are out, the eggs are cooling, the butter's getting hard, and the Jello's jigglin'! - Chick Hearn RIP
User avatar
lakerzkb8

 
Posts: 13904
Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2005 7:20 pm
Location: Canadaland

Postby kray28 on Sun Jan 13, 2008 10:31 pm

It was a makeup call for the blatant uncalled multi-step travel by Michelle which also got Kobe a T and gave the Grizz a free point.
User avatar
kray28

 
Posts: 21207
Joined: Wed May 09, 2007 8:16 pm
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

Postby hitokiriheero on Sun Jan 13, 2008 10:42 pm

i think also the guy is a no-name so he didn't get the benefit of the call. it also really looked like he didn't even try to make the shot, he just jumped into kwame and hoped for the best


clip of the play, judge for yourself

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yrJ-cThTuUc
Last edited by hitokiriheero on Mon Jan 14, 2008 12:31 am, edited 1 time in total.
hitokiriheero

 
Posts: 534
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 2:54 am

Postby z32 on Sun Jan 13, 2008 10:47 pm

^^ True also, but I think the main reason it looked bad was because Lowry bounced off and hit the floor after jumping into Kwame. Hehe, it's not Kwame's fault that he is built like Hercules, and everyone seems like mosquitos to him!
User avatar
z32

 
Posts: 4987
Joined: Sun Apr 23, 2006 12:20 pm
Location: Santa Clarita

Postby number8 on Sun Jan 13, 2008 10:51 pm

Does the Rule of Verticality apply if the defender is in the restricted area underneath the basket?

This seemed more like the Rule of "You Ain't Nobody Yet".
User avatar
number8

 
Posts: 1672
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 12:26 pm
Location: Los Angeles, CA

Postby z32 on Sun Jan 13, 2008 11:06 pm

number8 wrote:Does the Rule of Verticality apply if the defender is in the restricted area underneath the basket?

This seemed more like the Rule of "You Ain't Nobody Yet".


Yea, I'm pretty sure it applies everywhere on the court, whether it's in the restricted zone or not.
User avatar
z32

 
Posts: 4987
Joined: Sun Apr 23, 2006 12:20 pm
Location: Santa Clarita

Postby number8 on Sun Jan 13, 2008 11:17 pm

z32 wrote:
number8 wrote:Does the Rule of Verticality apply if the defender is in the restricted area underneath the basket?

This seemed more like the Rule of "You Ain't Nobody Yet".


Yea, I'm pretty sure it applies everywhere on the court, whether it's in the restricted zone or not.


I don't think it does. Otherwise, what's the point of having a restricted area? If you get called for a block if you're standing in the restricted area why would it be any different if you're in the air?
User avatar
number8

 
Posts: 1672
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 12:26 pm
Location: Los Angeles, CA

Postby Juronimo on Sun Jan 13, 2008 11:33 pm

We got lucky, that was obviously a foul on Kwame, I find it difficult to argue otherwise. I understand the rule of verticality in the sense that the defender is entitled to his space to a certain extent but in that case Kwame hit him. You could see his body language; Kwame knew he got away with one.
RIP Nelson Mandela
July 18, 1918 - December 5, 2013
User avatar
Juronimo

 
Posts: 6532
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2005 6:20 pm
Location: Dancing on Red's grave

Postby kray28 on Sun Jan 13, 2008 11:38 pm

It was a bad call. A rare game deciding home call in our favor....what sucks is that we didn't get more of those....it is our home floor after all right?

Rather it actually offset some other crap calls which went against us and allowed the Grizz back in it to begin with.
User avatar
kray28

 
Posts: 21207
Joined: Wed May 09, 2007 8:16 pm
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

Postby hitokiriheero on Sun Jan 13, 2008 11:43 pm

when I first saw it, I thought it was a foul too. but after watching a few replays and reading the rule, it is the right call. kwame jumped straight up, kept his arms straight. NOT a foul
hitokiriheero

 
Posts: 534
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 2:54 am

Postby bbfan99 on Sun Jan 13, 2008 11:44 pm

That was not even close to a foul. Kwame jumped backward, great non-call IMO.
bbfan99

 
Posts: 109
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2008 6:53 pm

Postby Alleyhoops on Sun Jan 13, 2008 11:46 pm

hah. dude got fouled. we got lucky. end of story.
Image
User avatar
Alleyhoops

 
Posts: 4240
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2004 6:08 pm
Location: Culver City California

Postby BDG on Sun Jan 13, 2008 11:48 pm

I don't know . . . Kwame seemed to go straight up to me. Saw it in person and just watched the replay . . . call me a homer, but I don't think Memphis got robbed there.
Image
Slava laughed at the suggestion his skills might be affected by the down time. "Are you kidding?" he said. "Basketball is like ball. It's all a circle."

BEST VIDEO EVER ... AND AND THE SECOND BEST.
User avatar
BDG
Retired Admin
 
Posts: 40945
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2003 10:45 pm
Location: Los Angeles

Postby Coppertop on Sun Jan 13, 2008 11:49 pm

Nowadays with that blasted "restraining arc" in the key, anytime an offensive player runs into a defensive player, they call a foul because it's a "no-charge zone". Forget the Rule of Verticality as stated above. Apparently "no charge zone" has been translated by the league/referees as "that has to be a blocking foul zone."

This was the first game in a long time where a defender (Kwame) has gone straight up and down, been crashed into by the offensive player (Lowry) and not been charged with a foul when maintaining position behind the arc.

I miss the days before that arc - why should it matter if you're two inches in front or two inches behind that line? It's a cop-out and catch-all for indecisive refs, I truly believe that.

'Bout time they called the game the way it's meant to be called.
User avatar
Coppertop

 
Posts: 1079
Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2003 3:30 pm
Location: Torrance, CA

Postby CheezStake on Mon Jan 14, 2008 12:29 am

It's all about player reputation in the final seconds. Kobe, DWade, Gilbert, AI all would be at the foul line in this situation. If Kwame were a rookie, a foul would have been called. Lucky for us it was Lowry attacking the glass, not Mike Miller or Gay. Glad the refs chose to "swallow the whistle" in the final seconds, which is nothing new and no reason for Memphis to feel cheated.
User avatar
CheezStake

 
Posts: 1516
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2007 2:55 pm
Location: Santa Ana

Postby z32 on Mon Jan 14, 2008 12:30 am

number8 wrote:
z32 wrote:
number8 wrote:Does the Rule of Verticality apply if the defender is in the restricted area underneath the basket?

This seemed more like the Rule of "You Ain't Nobody Yet".


Yea, I'm pretty sure it applies everywhere on the court, whether it's in the restricted zone or not.


I don't think it does. Otherwise, what's the point of having a restricted area? If you get called for a block if you're standing in the restricted area why would it be any different if you're in the air?


Yea, on second though, I really don't know if verticality applies in the restricted zone or not. I tried doing a search for the rule and info along positioning in the restricted area, but I couldn't find anything pertaining to it. If it does apply, then the non-call was legit. If it doesn't, then a foul should have been called.
User avatar
z32

 
Posts: 4987
Joined: Sun Apr 23, 2006 12:20 pm
Location: Santa Clarita

Postby scheven on Mon Jan 14, 2008 12:35 am

lol if that happened to kobe he wouldve KILLED the ref LOL
User avatar
scheven

 
Posts: 7738
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2005 4:47 am
Location: century tuna

Postby Fly Like A Mosquito Bite on Mon Jan 14, 2008 12:44 am

scheven wrote:lol if that happened to kobe he wouldve KILLED the ref LOL

:man10: :man10: :man10: True.
User avatar
Fly Like A Mosquito Bite

 
Posts: 3647
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2005 8:23 pm

Postby wcsoldier81 on Mon Jan 14, 2008 2:10 am

Even Stevie Wonder would have seen that Miller carried the ball .. plus this guy is a nobody .. no need to thank the refs
wcsoldier81

 
Posts: 6054
Joined: Mon Apr 03, 2006 1:20 am

Re: Rule of Verticality

Postby sleepin4matty on Mon Jan 14, 2008 2:34 am

z32 wrote:VERTICALITY-Verticality applies to a legal position. The basic components of the principle of verticality are:
Legal guarding position must be established and attained initially, and movement thereafter must be legal;
From this position, the defender may rise or jump vertically and occupy the space within his or her vertical plane;
The hands and arms of the defender may be raised within his or her vertical plane while the defender is on the floor or in the air;
The defender should not be penalized for leaving the floor vertically or having his or her hands and arms extended within the vertical plane;
The offensive player whether on the floor or airborne may not clear out or cause contact that is a foul;
The defender may not "belly up" or use the lower part of the body or arms to cause contact that is a foul outside his or her vertical plane.

http://www.hoopsvibe.com/basketball-coaching/basketball-rules/basketball-rules---definitions-ar419.html

That last play of the game really made me question exactly what the Rule of Verticality is. According to this definition, the important part bolded which really affects that play, the defender is allowed his vertical space if he has already established it, and doesn't need to have his hands or arms in a certain position, as long as they don't encroach horizontally towards the opposing player.

Now, I've looked at the replay a lot of times now, and I believe that the right non-call was made, based on the details of the verticality rule. Kwame had CLEARLY established himself inside the paint and thereby is allowed his own vertical space to move in. The real issue comes with his left hand which makes contact with Lowry's body. According to the rule though, Kwame is allowed any movement in his vertical space, as long as he does NOT initiate the contact with the player. The replay CLEARLY shows Lowry jumping INTO Kwame, and Kwame merely staying his ground and jumping STRAIGHT up, which he is allowed. His left hand does NOT move forward to initiate the contact with Lowry, but was merely used to shield him from Lowry.

I just felt this needed clarification since it was the single most important play of the game. Hope it eases some people's minds that it was a legit non-call, albeit, a TOUGH one to judge.


The referees made the correct non-call. That guy ran straight into Kwame. If anything it might have been a charging foul but who knows what might have been called at a different juncture in the game.
sleepin4matty

 
Posts: 881
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2005 1:16 am

Postby sleepin4matty on Mon Jan 14, 2008 2:36 am

Coppertop wrote:
This was the first game in a long time where a defender (Kwame) has gone straight up and down, been crashed into by the offensive player (Lowry) and not been charged with a foul when maintaining position behind the arc..


This is how guys like Ginobili and Tony Parker get so many free throws in the playoffs.
sleepin4matty

 
Posts: 881
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2005 1:16 am

Postby MarkMadsen on Mon Jan 14, 2008 10:35 am

i actually thought it was a good noncall when i first seen it but then the announcers kept saying how it was a bad call so I guess they kind of swayed my opinion from there.
Image
User avatar
MarkMadsen

 
Posts: 7461
Joined: Wed Jul 21, 2004 2:52 am
Location: Minnesota

Next

Return to Lakers Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], MSNbot Media, Yahoo [Bot] and 13 guests

cron
Advertise Here | Privacy Policy | ©2008 Sculu Sports. Come Strong.