"Rip-through" moves, in which an offensive player swings the ball into a defender's outstretched arm and then attempts a shot once he has created contact, will be considered non-shooting fouls if the contact begins before the offensive player starts his shooting motion.

Also, on drives to the basket, a shooting foul will be called only if contact occurs after the offensive player has begun his shooting motion, not after he has initiated his leap toward the basket.

"Certain types of contact involving the shooter were all being called in his favor," Jackson said. "It doesn't look good for the game. There was a strong feeling that those types of plays were creating an ill-advised reward for the shooter, often with three free throws."






http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/7329584/nba-alters-emphasis-shooting-fouls-2011-12

kobe does this a lot too. so does pierce.

yeah...that seems like something nba officials will be able to handle

No one does it nearly as much as Kevin Martin. He has arguably the ugliest offensive game for a shooting guard in the entire NBA. Dude spends more time jumping into his defender than he does taking jump shots. *****is unwatchable.

I think it's a better rule. I don't think it will be enforced very well. Also, it might be a non-shooting foul but it's still a foul, so offensive players will still get free throws after the limit and will still get defensive players in foul trouble with it.

IMO, the rip-through as described there (assuming the defensive player's arm is essentially stationary) should be a no-call. Hate it when players play for foul calls rather than good shots. If the offensive player initiates contact, it should be an offensive foul or no-call. Elbowing a defensive player who leaned in is an offensive foul, rip-throughs and jumping into the defender should be as well.

[This message has been edited by Ulrich (edited 12/8/2011 4:13p).]

[This message has been edited by Ulrich (edited 12/8/2011 4:13p).]

Maybe I'm an old fuddy duddy here, but if an offensive player initiates the contact shouldn't it be called an offensive foul?