Clear path foul

[kingsfan1984]

Should the clear path rules be changed so that if the team with ball (say they just stole it) had a player ahead of everyone else, but the ball handler is fouled before he can pass it ahead, should this become the new definition of a clear path?

Reason i ask is it is becoming very common that following a turnover to just foul right away to stop the play and bail out team that just turned it over. Occasionally the foul is made on player that is ahead of everyone and a clear path is called. However, if a teammate is ahead of everyone but the player with ball is fouled just beforw he is passing it to the guy streaking ahead, why is this not the same? I think rule should be edited to punish a team intentionally fouling in backcourt o stop a fast break from happening following any turnovers, or even long rebounds. Fouling someone intentionally away from the rim should never be a "good" basketbal play (outside of the end of games) and penalize a team that just made a good defensive play tp creat turnover ( taking away chance for wasy score)

Edited to try and make clearer

 

[eMBarkat10n]

Should rhe clear path rules be changed so that if the team with ball (say they just stole it) had a player ahead of everyone else, but the ball handler is fouled as he is passing it ahead, should this become the mew definition of a clear path?

Reason i ask is it is becoming very common that following a turnover to just foul right away to stop the play. Occasionally the foul is made on player that is ahead of everyone and a clear path is called. However, if a guy is aheaf of everyone but the player with ball is fouled just as he is passing it to the guy streaking ahead, why is this not the same? I think this should be considered a clear path too.

Well, technically speaking...

• If an offensive player is between the tip-off-circle in the backcourt and the basket in the frontcourt, and passes the ball to a teammate ahead of him, and is then fouled with no defender between him and the basket, a clear-path foul is called even though he no longer has the ball (provided the timing of the call deprives the offensive team from scoring).

http://official.nba.com/trigger/clear-path-to-the-basket-foul/

 

[kingsfan1984]

Well, technically speaking...

• If an offensive player is between the tip-off-circle in the backcourt and the basket in the frontcourt, and passes the ball to a teammate ahead of him, and is then fouled with no defender between him and the basket, a clear-path foul is called even though he no longer has the ball (provided the timing of the call deprives the offensive team from scoring).

http://official.nba.com/trigger/clear-path-to-the-basket-foul/

That is a much clearer definition than i provided pf current rule, but im talking about when their is a break away and the team with steal has a player streaking ahead but their is a foul immediately in backcourt before the pass can be made, and the foul was madewith the intent just to stop the breakaway easy score. Im not a fan of the intentional foul that is used to stop a breakaway following a turnover and good play by the defense. It bails out the bad play of the other team and punishes the team that made the good play by taking away a chance at easy score.

 

[eMBarkat10n]

That is a much clearer definition than i provided pf current rule, but im talking about when their is a break away and the team with steal has a player streaking ahead but their is a foul immediately in backcourt before the pass can be made, and the foul was madewith the intent just to stop the breakaway easy score. Im not a fan of the intentional foul that is used to stop a breakaway following a turnover and good play by the defense. It bails out the bad play of the other team and punishes the team that made the good play by taking away a chance at easy score.

Thanks for the clarification, I wouldn't change the rule. Why fix something if it ain't broken?

 

[kingsboi]

one of the worst calls in basketball IMO, it needs to be eliminated. If teams want to stop a fast break from happening and they can't run infront of the player to prevent the ball or beside the player, they shouldn't be penalized to that extent for doing so. It also slows the game down because now you have the refs going to the monitor and looking at every little detail and it gets annoying quick.

 

[kingsfan1984]

one of the worst calls in basketball IMO, it needs to be eliminated. If teams want to stop a fast break from happening and they can't run infront of the player to prevent the ball or beside the player, they shouldn't be penalized to that extent for doing so. It also slows the game down because now you have the refs going to the monitor and looking at every little detail and it gets annoying quick.

Agreed that going to the monitor to review should be eliminated. They will get it right majority of time. Less reviews the better

 

[edwardyoung111]

Glad you started this thread, because it reminds me of something I had never considered (before it happened).

This was a home game against Lakers at Arco when George Karl was coaching.

It was mid-game not crunch time, but here is what happened.

The Kings were running a set with the guards up top behind the three point line and the forwards were in the corners behind the nthree point line (i think caspi was at PF, so, the forwards were competent three point shooters).

Cousins sets up, back to the basket at the free throw line extended, so, there is reaqlly no opprtunity to deny or double team him without leaving someone open for a three.

I think it waqs Randle defending him but whoever it was, they decided to front him to tyry to deny the pass.

The guard lobs it over Randle to Cousins. Cousins turns to the basket and starts to drive for a dunk.

Randle grabs him because otherwise it is two points.

Ref (Washington, veteran) blows the whistle and immediaqtely waqlks to the scorers table to see the replay.

Everyone wonders what he is up to.

He looks, satisfies himself that he saw what he thought he saw and calls a clear path foul - two shots AND the ball.

I remember thinking that few players would know this variation of the rule and that in some future playoff game, down three points in the final seconds, Karl would run this set again, the player would foul thinking the worst that could happen would be that they stayed up one with the ball and instead, Cousins would make two and score off the ensuing inbounds pass for a series clinching playoff victory.

That dream died hard.