Below you can find some teaching material from 7 of our Points of Emphasis from the Eurobasket 2025 Qualification games played recently.

ACT OF SHOOTING

AOS 1

Situation: After a contact on AOS created by White 14 on the shooter Blue 26's arm. Centre referee called a FAOS on a 3 PFGA.

Outcome: As the shooter had already finished his shooting motion as well as the follow-through, the contact didn't have any effect on the shot so it can be considered as a marginal contact- Therefore it is a NC situation.

In addition, Centre referee is only focused on the ball and never made C-C-C, he just observed the shooter missing to RD. This is a classic example where incorrect IOT leads to incorrect judgment. 

AOS 2

Situation: During a 3 PFGA shot by Red 11, White 8 is trying the block the shoot. He jumps from the side and creates a contact on the shooter's fingers/palm. Trail referee calls a FAOS.

Outcome: As the contact influences the shot this is a FAOS. This contact cannot be considered a "high five" as the follow-through has not finished yet and moreover, the contact was created from the side. Trail referee with an AMI adjusted his position and followed the 123 AOS protocol, calling the foul when the play ended with PW.

AOS 3

Situation: White 22 tries to block Orange 0 shot for a 3 PFGA after a pump fake. The referee calls a FAOS.

Outcome: CCM, as the defender moved forward and invaded the shooter's cylinder, creating a contact on the shooter's arms and body. Besides identifying the POC, RD and PPL are the keys to get a quality decision.

AOS 4

Situation: White 22 tries to block a 3 PFGA made by Orange 7. Contact occurs on the right shooter's forearm. While landing, the shooter falls to the floor.

Outcome: Regarding the contact, as the ball had already been released and the follow-through had finished the contact should be considered a marginal one, so CNC. Orange 7's landing is not a FK as he is trying to protect himself from ankle/knee injury and there is no second action. Both CNCs with a correct PPL by Centre referee.

FAKE BEING FOULED

FK 01

Situation: White 26 receives a pass from White 34 and starts a transition. Red 20 is running towards White 26 and tries to establish a LGP but he arrives late on the spot when a contact occurs between those two players. C Referee decides a standard FK and because of repetition he gives a TF to R20.

Outcome: C took the decision from CA. This play needs a call according to the level of contact, illegal contact, BL.

FK 02

Situation: Red 10 is in AOS. After releasing the ball he falls down and C give him a warning for FK - standard.

Outcome: The shooter spread his leg trying to create a contact with the defender, which actually happened, but it was such a marginal contact that did not create any effect on the opponent. Naturally he became unbalanced and fell down trying to protect himself. There was no second action, so this is not a FK.

FK 03

Situation: White 19 is dribbling in his frontcourt, guarded by Red 4. The ball moves to the sideline and C referee calls a TF for FK standard repetition.

Outcome: C referee did not see the contact created by Red 4, holding dribbler's right arm as he was more focused on the ball movement to the sideline than on the players. This is a defensive foul for holding.

CHARGE-BLOCK

CH/BL 01

Situation: After the rebound Blue 50 dribbles towards the opponents' basket and then he decides to pass the ball to his teammate Blue 5, who is standing in the corner. White 7 established a LGP and stands outside the NCSC, but when the contact occurs White 7 moves sidewards and towards Blue 50, the offensive contact is not on the torso. L referee calls a BLOCKING foul.

Outcome: Correct decision from L, who SWP and read well the actions of the help defender. Defender White 7 did not arrive first at the point of contact as it did not occur on his torso. 

CH/BL 02

Situation: After the rebound, offensive player White 24, without the ball, runs down the court. Help defender Blue 50 comes into the running path of his moving opponent. Contact occurs between both players. Lead referee calls a blocking foul to Blue 50.

Outcome: Correct decision – Blocking foul.

Defender Blue 50 did not respect the elements of time and distance in taking his initial LGP, so that the offensive player White 24, not controlling the ball, could avoid the contact. When guarding a player who does not control the ball, the elements of time and distance shall apply.

CH/BL 03

Situation: After a rebound and outlet, White 1 dribbles and runs the transition. Defender Blue 9 establishes a LGP in the running lane of White 1 and contact a is created on the torso of Blue 9. The referees called a Charge.

Outcome: Correct decision – Charge.

Defender Blue 9 established a LGP, and the contact was on the torso. Player White 1 with the ball must expect to be guarded and must be prepared to stop or change his direction whenever an opponent takes an initial LGP in front of him, even if this is done within a fraction of a second. When guarding a player who controls the ball, the elements of time and distance do not apply. 

CH/BL 04

Situation: The dribbler, White 11, passed his primary defender and drove to the opponents' basket. After gathering the ball, help defender Orange 10 tries to defend him close to the baseline. Orange10 was late to the baseline and unable to cut off White 11 drive and created a contact on White 11 hip, who had already started his AOS.

Outcome: Incorrect No Call.

This was a BL FAOS. L was picking up the help defender too late and had just a snapshot. C had OA and could have given help with a CW.

After the offensive rebound, QW from both referees (probably recognizing ICNC and just waiting to call). Correct call on the second foul.

SCREENS

SCR 01

Situation: After receiving a pass from a teammate, Blue 12 tries to make a hand-off pass to his teammate Blue 19, who is closely guarded by White 0. The referee decided there was not any illegal contact on the screening and let them play.

Outcome: While Blue 19 uses the screen of the ball handler, Blue 12 moves into the path of White 0 creating an illegal contact with his back on the right side of White 0, influencing his FOM. An illegal SCR should have been called.

SCR 02

Situation: White 11 is trying to set a SCR on Red 8, who is guarding White 7, dribbling the ball. During the screen a contact occurred between Red 8 and White 11. Trail calls an illegal SCR, TCF by White 11.

Outcome: Incorrect decision by Trail. While White 11 was running to set the SCR Red 20 pushed him with the arms towards Red 8. The first illegal contact was a pushing foul created by Red 20 and a defensive foul should have been called to him.

Trail uses PRO, verbally addressing the players on the match-up with the ball, and in this moment, he moves his eyes away to the match-up OFB White 11-Red 20 and then he came back to the match-up with the ball. When finally picking up both matchups, it was too late to recognize the first illegal play, Trail just had a snapshot instead of the "whole movie". Incorrect 3PO and IOT lead to incorrect judgment. 

SCR 03

Situation: Blue 2 sets a SCR for his teammate Blue 6 who is dribbling, and contact occurred with White 3. Centre called FK standard repetition (The White Team was already warned officially for standard FK) to White 3. Leading to a TF according to the OBR.

Outcome: Incorrect decision by Centre.

White 9 pushed Blue 2 with his arms, which was the first illegal play and caused the contact on the SCR. A defensive foul to White 9 should have been called as this was the first illegal action.

Like in the previous example, the referee doesn't have the "whole movie', just the snapshot, and was moving while refereeing the play, missing to RD. Incorrect IOT leads to incorrect decisions.

In addition, Centre continued moving while signalling and unnecessary moved almost to the imaginary line between the two baskets to report to the scorers' table, instead of staying on the OPS, establishing visual contact with the scorer, and verbally supporting his signals while reporting.

SCR 04

Situation: After the end of the transition White 13 sets the SCR to his teammate White 32 who dribbles the ball and a contact occurred with Red 6. Trail called FK standard by Red 6.

Outcome: Incorrect decision by the Trail. While setting the SCR, White 13 stopped in the very last moment in front of an opponent without the ball, Red 6, disregarding the elements of time and distance, so Red 6 cannot avoid the contact by either stopping or passing the screen. This contact affects Red 6's FOM, so an illegal SCR should have been called.

UNSPORTSMANLIKE FOUL

UF 01

Situation: Blue 6 gets the ball and starts a transition. White 2 is in front of him and tries to play the ball, creating an illegal contact which is followed by a reaction of the dribbler, Blue 6, with his arm. An unsportsmanlike foul is called.

Outcome: Defender Blue 2 is in LGP facing his opponent, there is no unnecessary stoppage of the transition, this is normal basketball play.

Incorrect decision, a PF should have been called. 

UF 02

Situation: White 12 receives the long pass and goes for the layup, then Blue 43 creates excessive contact by grabbing and holding the shooters arm. An unsportsmanlike foul is called.

Outcome: Correct decision by L. An unsportsmanlike foul is a player contact which, in the judgement of a referee is excessive, hard contact caused by a player in an effort to play the ball or an opponent. UF C2.

UF 03

Situation: During the FB Red 4 passed the ball to his teammate Red 11 when the last defensive player White 7 pushed him in the back. An unsportsmanlike foul was called by the Lead referee.

Outcome: Correct decision by Lead – UF C4

An illegal contact caused by a player from behind or laterally on an opponent, who is progressing towards the opponent's basket and with no opponents between the progressing player and the basket, and

• the ball has been released on a pass to the progressing player. This applies until the offensive player starts his/her act of shooting.

UF 04

Situation: Turnover and steal by team A. White 3 dribbles in transition and is defended by Red 19 who reaches towards the ball from the side, White 3 exaggerates the contact. A personal foul is called against Red 19 by the Centre referee.

Outcome: Correct decision by the Centre. Legitimate attempt to directly play for the ball by Red 19, arm across the body of White 3 was affecting the dribbler White 3 in his FOM and speed. Personal foul Red 19.

UF 05

Situation: White 7 dribbles and drives to the basket. When passing his primary defender, Red 8, help defender, Red 44, standing in a wide stance, creates contact on the left arm of White 7, and there is a foot against foot contact, White 7 falls to the floor. L referee calls a PF.

Outcome: Correct decision by L. Red 44 was in a wide stance position, IUH on White 7. Point for discussion was the foot against foot contact. There was no intention of tripping by Red 44, it was more an incidental contact. IUH and BL due to the wide stance out of cylinder (BL) by Red 44, personal foul. 

TRAVELLING

TV 01

Situation: White 1 receives a pass from White 44 in the high post. Then, with a spin movement White 1 turns to his left and starts a drive to the basket. Lead referee calls a TV.

Outcome: CCM. He spins with his right foot (PVF) and then lifts this foot before releasing the ball. This illegal movement gives a big advantage to the offensive player and makes defence either impossible or by means of a foul. Lead referee had an AMI and was focused on the play, being stationary at the proper distance with an OA.

TV 02

Situation: White 21 receives the ball and spins towards the basket, where he stops and tries to face the basket.

Outcome: In his movement under the basket, right foot was PVF. He lifted it and put it again on the floor before the shot, getting an advantage to face the basket more easily. Finally, he missed the shot, but the TV was incorrectly not called.

TV 03

Situation: Yellow 7 drives to the basket and he jumps on the same foot twice consecutively before passing the ball to Yellow 22 under the basket, where a FAOS is called by C and L.

Outcome: ICNC TV. T is responsible for the TV, following the match-up from the beginning through the development until the end and has the OA: this is his play. Then, PF for IUH during AOS. C is in primary. L doesn't need to make a call, but use a CW. Unnecessary DW by L.

TV 04

Situation: White 17 receives the ball and starts a dribble. Then he passes the ball to White 12, who jumps with the ball, before releasing the ball for a shot, Blue 8 also jumps and places his hand firmly on the ball. Then both players come to the court with one or both hands firmly on the ball.

Outcome: ICNC TV on top of the key. White 17 received the ball with his right foot on the floor (step 0), then he put his left foot on the court, then his right foot again, and used this right foot as PVF. Second action, correct rule knowledge and PPL by Lead referee, calling a HB.

PROTOCOLS

PROTOCOLS 01

Situation: White 2 drives to the basket while Blue 5 tries to stop him creating a contact. Lead calls FAOS.

Outcome: Correct decision by Lead as the illegal contact occurred immediately after the ball had come to rest in the right palm of White 2. In such a situation where it is not so clear if the ball came to rest in the dribbler's palm before the illegal contact or not, Lead used the Protocol regarding FAOS/FNAOS and decided it is FAOS.

Clear example that the appropriate use of Protocol leads to correct decision and establishing a good benchmark at the beginning of the game for the same/almost the same playing situations until the EOG. 

PROTOCOLS 02

Situation: Red 9 drives towards the opponents' basket when White 6 creates an illegal contact on him. Centre called the foul and decided it was FNAOS.

Outcome:The moment when White 9 creates an illegal contact and the moment when Red 9 gathered the ball are so close that according to the Protocol FAOS/FNAOS it is FAOS, and two free throws should have been awarded to Red 9.

Not applying the protocol correctly leads to an incorrect judgment.

PROTOCOLS 03

Situation: Trail stopped the game when GC displayed 1:22 and SC 23 in order to reset the SC. After a short break the game was resumed with a T-IN by the Red Team behind the side-line from the place nearest to where the game was interrupted with 1:22 on the GC and, 20 seconds on the SC.

Outcome: Correct decision by Trail. At the initial T-IN in the BC of the Red team Trail picked-up the last two digits on the GC, which was 26, and when the game was stopped he was able to resolve the malfunction of the SC quickly. It was just a question of mathematics; GC 26-22 is 4 seconds. So, the SC should display 24-4 which is 20 seconds.

Correct applying the protocol regarding control of SC leads to correct and quick decision.