The Hoops Official - April 23'

This April edition of the Hoops Official showcases a selection of captivating plays including no-call at the EuroLeague Women Bronze game and a brawl of unprecedent scale at EuroLeague Playoffs

1. No-call that decided to EuroleagueWomen F4 bronze game.

The Euroleague Women Final 4 bronze game between Beretta Famila Schio and ZVVZ USK Praha was tied and with just seconds left on the clock, Schio had possession of the ball for a throw-in. However, they turned the ball over, and #11 Valeriane VUKOSAVLJEVIC of Praha gained control of the ball. As she attempted to transition to attack, she collided with an opponent player and lost the ball, leading to a controversial no-call by the referee. Another #11 Egle SVENTORAITE from Schio seized the opportunity, gaining control of the loose ball and winning the game for her team with a buzzer-beating 3-pointer.

When judging a charge/block situation involving a player with the ball, a referee shall use the following principles according to FIBA OBR (Official Basketball Rules) 33.4:

The defensive player must establish an initial legal guarding position by facing the player with the ball and having both feet on the court.

• The defensive player may remain stationary, jump vertically, move laterally or backwards in order to maintain the initial legal guarding position.

• When moving to maintain the initial legal guarding position, one foot or both feet may be off the court for an instant, as long as the movement is lateral or backwards, but not towards the player with the ball.

• Contact must occur on the torso, in which case the defensive player would be considered as having been at the place of contact first.

• Having established a legal guarding position, the defensive player may turn within his/her cylinder to avoid injury.

If a defensive player has established a legal guarding position first, they are allowed to move in any direction except towards the offensive player. Did player #3 from Schio establish a legal guarding position before the incident occurred? Between the 0:04 and 0:06 mark, the defender was seen in motion, but never established a legal guarding position. The lateral movement cannot be considered an attempt to maintain the legal guarding position. The screenshot below taken from the initial contact, shows the defender is still in motion, indicating that she was not in the place of contact first.

Therefore, a blocking foul could have been called which would have meant two FTs for Praha, as both of the teams were in the bonus. This no-call was as critical as it gets, as it decided the winner of the bronze game.

2. Malice in the Palace (Palacio de Deportes de la Comunidad - Wizink Center).

Towards the end of the fourth quarter, Partizan is leading the game by 15 points with only 1 minute and 45 seconds left on the clock. This would mean that Partizan would return to Belgrade with a 2-0 lead in the best-of-five playoff series. A EuroLeague veteran, Sergio Llull, commits a severe foul against Kevin Punter, which is immediately called and signaled as an unsportsmanlike foul as seen in the video. Kevin Punter's reaction towards Sergio Llull after the foul pushes an already frustrated Real Madrid team over the edge, resulting in a massive brawl that is unprecedented in EuroLeague history. The game is stopped at that point, and the score at the time of the incident is considered as the final score of the game.

FIBA OBR rules on violence and fighting are defined in two different articles: Article 38.2, which governs violence on the court by players and the responsibilities of the authorities, and Article 39, which applies to substitutes, head coaches, first assistant coaches, excluded players, and accompanying delegation members who leave the team bench area during a fight or any situation that could lead to a fight.

The following points are relevant to the incident under FIBA rules: Article 38.2.2 states that referees must take necessary action to stop acts of violence involving players on the court or in its vicinity. Article 38.2.3 indicates that players who are guilty of acts of aggression on opponents or referees shall be disqualified. Article 38.2.4 allows public order enforcement officers to enter the court only when requested by the referees, except when spectators enter the court with the intent to commit acts of violence, in which case they must intervene immediately to protect the teams and referees.

The observations made based on FIBA rules include the commendable efforts of Oļegs Latiševs, an experienced EuroLeague referee, to prevent the fight from escalating, in contrast to the other two referees who gave up at some point. As per FIBA rules, public safety enforcement is authorized to intervene without invitation from the referees when spectators enter the court with the intention of committing acts of violence. In this scenario, the first public order enforcement officers entered the court at the 0:18 mark of the video without any invitation from the referees, although there were no spectators present on the court at that moment.

Players on the court involved in the violence were penalized accordingly after review by the referees. All 10 players except Sergio Llull, who sparked the incident with a foul, received a disqualifying foul. Article 39 stipulates that substitutes, excluded players, or accompanying delegation members who leave the team bench area during a fight shall be disqualified. Only a head coach and/or first assistant coach are permitted to leave the team bench area during a fight and should not be disqualified. In this case, each player who left the bench area was charged with a disqualifying foul, and a single technical foul was charged to the team's head coach, regardless of the number of players disqualified.

The penalty for disqualifying fouls is two free throws plus possession. If both teams receive the same number of disqualifying fouls, the penalties cancel each other out, and the game continues from where it left off. However, the game cannot continue if a team cannot field at least two players according to FIBA rules (Article 21.1). In this case, only Sergio Llull remained on the court, and the game ended with 1:40 on the clock.

EuroLeague later imposed suspensions on the following players: Guershon Yabusele for five games, Kevin Punter for two games, Gabriel Deck for one game, and Matthias Lessort for one game.

3. Interference Call: Basket canceled after review in Piraeus.

EuroLeague Playoffs have started! Regular season 1st seed Olympiacos hosted 8th seed Fenerbahce Beko for the 1st game of the best of 5 matchup. Late in the fourth quarter, Fenerbahce center Jonathan Motley attempted to block Olympiacos’ McKissic’s layup, but in doing so, he touched the backboard. An interference call was made and the basket was deemed valid by the referees at first. Instant Replay System was then used to determine whether or not interference had occurred, and the original decision was overturned.

Although FIBA does govern the circumstances around interference with FIBA Rulebook Article 31, it leaves room for referees’ interpretation and judgment on the court. According to FIBA 31.2.4 Interference occurs when:

• After a shot for a goal or the last free throw a player touches the basket or the backboard while the ball is in contact with the ring.

• After a free throw followed by an additional free throw(s), a player touches the ball, the basket, or the backboard while the ball has still a possibility to enter the basket.

• A player reaches through the basket from below and touches the ball.

• A defensive player touches the ball or the basket while the ball is within the basket, thus preventing the ball from passing through the basket.

• A player causes the basket to vibrate or grasp the basket in such a way that, in the judgment of a referee, the ball has been prevented from entering the basket or has been caused to enter the basket.

• A player grasps the basket and plays the ball.

At 0:21 of the video, we observe that Motley touches the backboard while the ball is still in contact with the shooter’s hands. Motley also does not touch the basket (net +rim) and the ball does not touch the rim at all. However, Motley does cause to basket to vibrate by means of touching the backboard which brings the 4th bullet point of the Art. 31.4 to the spotlight. That is where the referee’s judgment comes into play. Considering all the circumstances such as the time of the contact with the backboard, the trajectory of the ball before and after the contact, and whether the ball touched the rim or not a referee must judge if the ball had a chance to enter the basket. On this occasion after the review referees decided otherwise and canceled the basket by overturning their initial call.

4. Does the "Too Small" gesture commonly seen NBA warrant a technical according to FIBA rules?

This question arose during a recent game in the Turkish BSL when Tofas shooting guard Rob Gray drove to the basket and scored over his opponent. After the basket, he used the "too small" gesture at Xavier Rathan-Mayes, mocking his opponent, a move that is frequently seen in the NBA. However, the referees penalized Gray with a technical foul for his gesture.

FIBA Rulebook Article 36 defines the Rule of Conduct for the game and infractions that can be penalized with a technical foul. 36.1.2 states that:

”Each team shall do its best to secure victory, but this must be done in the spirit of sportsmanship and fair play.”

While FIBA rules suggest that a warning can be issued to prevent a technical it is important to keep in mind that it is not mandatory – and referees’ judgment on the intention, intensity, and scale all play a role if a warning should be given first.

Article 36.2 offers a long non-exclusive list of infractions that could warrant a technical foul. The article and the list emphasize that a technical foul is a “non-contact” foul.

Among the list bullet point 4 is the most relevant for the infraction we observe in the video:

-Baiting and taunting an opponent.

It is fair to say Rob Gray was aiming to taunt his opponent, and therefore referees were well within their rights to call the technical. Could this have been just a warning?  It does not have to be if the referees saw fit. However, the internet commentary was talking about a prior warning given to Rob Gray. In any case, in tournaments played under the FIBA regime, the “too small” or similar gesture might very well be penalized with a technical foul.