Why not a cylinder foul?
- Thread starter Pgreene1644
- Start date
Cause it's Kentucky... don't you know the rules?
I think the cylinder rule only applies if it goes against us.
Honest question, do any of you even know what a cylinder foul is? That's clearly not a cylinder foul.
I thought an elbow to the face was legal if the defender was that close (2 hands on his body). Someone needs to explain how this BS works...
I find it hard to see any difference in that call and last week. If you don’t see that than you are the one that might not know what your talking about.
“If the defensive player invades that cylinder, if there’s any contact other than the offensive player clearing out space, then the foul’s going to be on the defender.”
Cahill said that interpretation will be interesting when a defender is clipped, perhaps in the face, and the foul is called on that defender for invading the offensive player’s cylinder.
Cahill said that interpretation will be interesting when a defender is clipped, perhaps in the face, and the foul is called on that defender for invading the offensive player’s cylinder.
The only difference seems to be the distance from the basket. Does that matter by rule?
“If the defender has invaded the space of the offensive player and the offensive player attempts a “normal basketball play” (defined as attempting to shoot, pass, dribble, or pivot) by moving his elbows from side to side either above the shoulders or below the waist with the forearms more vertical than horizontal, any resulting contact (other than incidental contact) to a defensive player caused by the swinging of the elbow shall result in a foul on the defense.”
Mitchell tried to clear out space behind him with his elbow and hit the guy in the neck area. If his defender was playing so close the defender was within space Mitchell was entitled to (I'm bad at explaining physical shapes, basically the space within the cylinder in the below picture) it would have been a cylinder foul because Mitchell is entitled to that space. He's not entitled to the 6-12 inches behind him when he's posting up.
I agree, that was a good call. The cylinder foul call the other day was questionable but not this one.
There is a clear double standard by the SEC refs, but Mitchell did himself no favors there.
Great example was that egregious call on that Sheppard block - which was as clean a block as a player can make. Refs had already decided to call that, made up their damned minds.
Great example was that egregious call on that Sheppard block - which was as clean a block as a player can make. Refs had already decided to call that, made up their damned minds.
We have too many rules for Basketball (and football). All these subjective rules five way too much leniency to ref
Cut out these crazy ass elbow rules / going to monitor, hook and hold need to go, etc. Refs have way too leeway to call crap snd impact games
Cut out these crazy ass elbow rules / going to monitor, hook and hold need to go, etc. Refs have way too leeway to call crap snd impact games
and if the defending player has his hands on the player which he did he is in your pretty little cylinder.
The contact was to the face/neck area. For it to be a cylinder foul the contact has to be to the part of the defender that's within the cylinder.
Where's Dane Bradshaw when you need him? He is the expert on the rule. He only talked about it for 30 minutes.
In a world that I made the rules: Both would be a no call. Both the offensive player and the defensive player have equal right to the space in which they met. Play on.
Similar threads
