The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #61 (permalink)  
Old Fri Jun 20, 2014, 11:12pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 307
Send a message via AIM to IUgrad92
Tough play either way, and from the discussion and frame by frame breakdown there is still differing thoughts. This could easily be a play that, if it happens two nights in a row, you might call it differently for each, depending on a number of factors.

However this 'close' play ends up getting called, the best thing as a crew is to just make sure anything similar at the other end of the court goes the same direction for consistency.....

Agree though that L should not have had a primary whistle, rather been there for a 'crew call', if needed.
__________________
When the horn sounds, we're outta here.
Reply With Quote
  #62 (permalink)  
Old Sat Jun 21, 2014, 02:42am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: In the offseason.
Posts: 12,260
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pantherdreams View Post
Looking at your photos. She's legal in frame 2 before she gets hit, she's legal in frame three.
She would be legal if she didn't continue to move forward. The LGP rules quite clearly state that moving forward negates LGP if contact occurs during the forward movement. If the movement is upward (verticality) it would be legal, but there isn't even a hint of such movement. Even if there were, that doesn't excuse the forward movement.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pantherdreams View Post
Where she choses to put her chest/stomach inside her cylinder isn't illegal whether she sticks her butt back or lifts her chest and legs up (which will move her hips and ribs outward/foward everytime). It only becomes illegal when she extends beyond her cylinder or plane.

You are the one combining the LGP and verticality rules. Most posters here are trying to keep them separate.
Verticality is about vertical movement....none of which happens in this play. Also, the cylinder (no such thing, really, verticality is defined by a plane) isn't defined by where the player puts their feet but where the front of torso is located. Your entire argument hinges on a defender having the right to space in front of them which they are not occupying. No defender has such rights. She is moving her entire torso into new space all the way to the point of contact.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pantherdreams View Post
If she were standing still prior to the play and the difference in her body between frame 2 and 3 that you posted was just her choice of movement to challenge shooter, protect herself whatever . . .would you have a foul. Just standing there and her posture from frame 2-3 was only change?
Yes. First, no one can stand with the posture in #2 without falling on their butt. Even if she could, it would still be a foul. She is moving forward and sticking her chest/belly out in front of the position she legally obtained. Verticality and the cylinder doesn't really apply here but even it if did, she's moving it forward, not moving up within it.

Verticality, as in firming up, isn't what is happening here. She isn't straightening the body to be aligned vertically which usually occurs when a player raises up with their shoulders arms bring the belly/hips forward to be in line with the shoulders. She is moving all parts forward....not the same thing as bringing the midsection inline with the upper body.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pantherdreams View Post
The offensive player has no expectation of time and space. I think you are punishing the defender for what she was doing prior to establishing LGP. ie. Facing and in path. Rather then officiating what she does once she has it.
Again, by still moving forward, she gives up any LGP she may have obtained.

I quote the guarding rule again:

Quote:
c.The guard may move laterally or obliquely to maintain position, provided it is not toward the opponent when contact occurs
d. The guard may raise hands or jump within his/her own vertical plane.
She IS moving forward, not upward....LGP lost.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pantherdreams View Post
I know your argument may be that she doesn't have it. But by the requirements she does have LGP. I think you are the only person counting torso movement inside her cylinder (or from behind to into depending on your take) as forward movement. Occupying space you are entitled to should not be a foul/
The movement is NOT inside her cylinder. Her cylinder is where she is, not in front of it...and only UPWARD movement is allowed by verticality. The space she is entitled to is not the space in front of her.


Here is another rule quote covering verticality (found in the section on the use of hands/arms):

Quote:
It is legal to extend the arms vertically above the shoulders and need not be lowered to avoid contact with an opponent when the action of the opponent causes contact.
Note that the reference for verticality in this rule is the shoulders, not the feet.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com
Commissioner, Portland Basketball Officials Association

Last edited by Camron Rust; Mon Jun 23, 2014 at 02:37pm.
Reply With Quote
  #63 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jun 25, 2014, 10:36pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: West Orange, NJ
Posts: 2,583
So here's the upshot on this play from one of my assignors/supervisors (I sent them the original clip, not the super slo-mo): it's a player-control foul.

Why? The defender established LGP and and did not lose it prior to the illegal contact by the BH/dribbler.

How? The defender had two feet on the floor and her torso was facing her opponent. There's nothing in the LGP rule requiring the rest of her body to come to a halt for LGP to be established.

What about the "movement" by the defender? "Movement" is generally thought to involve the feet and the defender didn't create/cause the contact. My assignor/supervisor agreed with my statement that verticality allows the defender to rise/straighten herself since that's written into the rule.

Believe me, this assignor/supervisor would've told me if I had it wrong...in a heartbeat.
__________________
"Everyone has a purpose in life, even if it's only to serve as a bad example."
"If Opportunity knocks and he's not home, Opportunity waits..."
"Don't you have to be stupid somewhere else?" "Not until 4."
"The NCAA created this mess, so let them live with it." (JRutledge)
Reply With Quote
  #64 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jun 25, 2014, 11:38pm
Esteemed Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 22,934
Illegal Movement ???

Quote:
Originally Posted by JetMetFan View Post
What about the "movement" by the defender? "Movement" is generally thought to involve the feet and the defender didn't create/cause the contact.
I can live with the player control foul, it's a tough bang bang play, but ...

Movement only involves the feet? That's a tough one to swallow.

Does this mean that hip checks, and elbows to the ribs, aren't considered movement if the feet aren't moving?

Was it legal for Moe to poke Curly's eyes because Moe's feet weren't moving?
__________________
"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." (John 3:16)

“I was in prison and you came to visit me.” (Matthew 25:36)

Last edited by BillyMac; Thu Jun 26, 2014 at 12:04am.
Reply With Quote
  #65 (permalink)  
Old Thu Jun 26, 2014, 12:36am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: In the offseason.
Posts: 12,260
Quote:
Originally Posted by JetMetFan View Post
So here's the upshot on this play from one of my assignors/supervisors (I sent them the original clip, not the super slo-mo): it's a player-control foul.

Why? The defender established LGP and and did not lose it prior to the illegal contact by the BH/dribbler.

How? The defender had two feet on the floor and her torso was facing her opponent. There's nothing in the LGP rule requiring the rest of her body to come to a halt for LGP to be established.
Again, it is not about establishing LGP...she had that. But there are ways to lose it.. I quote the rule:
Quote:
ART 3. After the initial legal guarding position is obtained...
The guard may move laterally or obliquely to maintain position, provided it is not toward the opponent when contact occurs.
By this rule, she lost it after having gained it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JetMetFan View Post
What about the "movement" by the defender? "Movement" is generally thought to involve the feet and the defender didn't create/cause the contact.
I think your assignor is wrong about movement. Why? Players don't play defense by sticking their feet in front of their opponents. That, alone, even if both are on the floor is not sufficient. Defensive position is about the body. The feet are merely a marker used to indicate when in time LGP is obtained but the body is what is doing the guarding and what is regulated by the guarding rule.
Quote:
Guarding is the act of legally placing the body..."
Both players created contact since both were moving towards each other. Plus, creating contact isn't illegal and is a bad way to define who gets the foul.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JetMetFan View Post
My assignor/supervisor agreed with my statement that verticality allows the defender to rise/straighten herself since that's written into the rule.
That is true. But that isn't what this player did. There was absolutely no vertical element to this play.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com
Commissioner, Portland Basketball Officials Association
Reply With Quote
  #66 (permalink)  
Old Thu Jun 26, 2014, 04:26pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: In the offseason.
Posts: 12,260
Got some input from my current and past assignors. They both had a PC.

In speaking to one of them, he said he had to watch it multiple times, even in slow-mo, to come to a conclusion of PC but would't disagree with someone who had a block since it was so close.

Verticality was not mentioned as the reason.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com
Commissioner, Portland Basketball Officials Association
Reply With Quote
  #67 (permalink)  
Old Thu Jun 26, 2014, 06:29pm
Esteemed Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 22,934
I Second The Motion ...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Camron Rust View Post
Verticality was not mentioned as the reason.
What did they say about forward motion?
__________________
"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." (John 3:16)

“I was in prison and you came to visit me.” (Matthew 25:36)
Reply With Quote
  #68 (permalink)  
Old Fri Jun 27, 2014, 02:01am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: In the offseason.
Posts: 12,260
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyMac View Post
What did they say about forward motion?
That is where the one I spoke with mentioned he wouldn't disagree with someone who called it a block but he felt the defender did enough for him to have a PC.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com
Commissioner, Portland Basketball Officials Association

Last edited by Camron Rust; Fri Jun 27, 2014 at 12:10pm.
Reply With Quote
  #69 (permalink)  
Old Fri Jun 27, 2014, 06:16am
AremRed
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
There's a point where the margins get too small to get this call right. I agree with Camron's analysis, and still have a block which I've had from the beginning.
Reply With Quote
  #70 (permalink)  
Old Fri Jun 27, 2014, 10:57am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: West Orange, NJ
Posts: 2,583
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyMac View Post
Movement only involves the feet? That's a tough one to swallow.
No putting words in my mouth . The wording was "generally" not "only." Obviously there are other forms of movement.
__________________
"Everyone has a purpose in life, even if it's only to serve as a bad example."
"If Opportunity knocks and he's not home, Opportunity waits..."
"Don't you have to be stupid somewhere else?" "Not until 4."
"The NCAA created this mess, so let them live with it." (JRutledge)
Reply With Quote
  #71 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jul 01, 2014, 11:45pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 769
Realize I'm late to the game on this one but 2 points. First, I literally laughed out loud on this...


Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyMac View Post
Easy. The trash can was there first, has legal guarding position, and doesn't move in any direction. Legal play on the trash can. Player control foul on dribbler.
Second, PC. Without the frame by frame analysis which I'm not smart enough to do in a game, to me the defender got to the spot first and the contact was center mass. That's what I would process in my own mind in a game to get to my PC conclusion. (Plus PC is my favorite call of all and I look good calling it! After all, that's what is important, right? )
__________________
Some people are like Slinkies...
Not really good for anything, but they still bring a smile to your face when you push them down a flight of stairs.
Reply With Quote
  #72 (permalink)  
Old Fri Jul 04, 2014, 07:10am
Official & Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 1,379
Just getting caught up on this thread...reading through the debate...great analysis on a true 50/50 play...my take is this: If we are still debating after looking at super slow mo and using stacks of definitions, geometry, and rules citations to decide the right call, I can easily live with the call made by the official on the spot in real time. I don't think either side of this debate is absolutely correct.

But this made me spit out my coffee:

Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyMac View Post
Was it legal for Moe to poke Curly's eyes because Moe's feet weren't moving?
Nyuk Nyuk Nyuk. Happy 4th Billy.
__________________
Calling it both ways...since 1999

Last edited by Bad Zebra; Fri Jul 04, 2014 at 07:21am.
Reply With Quote
  #73 (permalink)  
Old Fri Jul 04, 2014, 09:23am
Esteemed Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 22,934
The Six Stooges ???

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bad Zebra View Post
Nyuk Nyuk Nyuk. Happy 4th Billy.
In the spirit of Independence Day, and with the God given right that all red blooded American males above a certain age have to revere the Three Stooges, who can name all six Three Stooges? Yeah, that's right, six (and I'm not talking about the recent 2012 movie). No fair using the internet.
__________________
"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." (John 3:16)

“I was in prison and you came to visit me.” (Matthew 25:36)

Last edited by BillyMac; Fri Jul 04, 2014 at 09:28am.
Reply With Quote
  #74 (permalink)  
Old Fri Jul 04, 2014, 09:37am
Rich's Avatar
Get away from me, Steve.
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 15,767
When a call is this close, the official's first reaction is going to be the "right" call. Once in a great while, the call is truly 50/50.

Personally, I would ship a 50/50 call like this every time (I hope). It's hard to play defense. If it's this close, reward the defender.
Reply With Quote
  #75 (permalink)  
Old Fri Jul 04, 2014, 11:07am
Do not give a damn!!
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: On the border
Posts: 30,463
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich View Post
When a call is this close, the official's first reaction is going to be the "right" call. Once in a great while, the call is truly 50/50.

Personally, I would ship a 50/50 call like this every time (I hope). It's hard to play defense. If it's this close, reward the defender.
I give the defense the benefit of the doubt almost all of the time when I can. You are working that hard to get in someone's way, you are getting the call. And I believe that most of the time we call these incorrectly anyway on the defense when they do nothing illegal. But as you stated, it is usually not that close.

Peace
__________________
Let us get into "Good Trouble."
-----------------------------------------------------------
Charles Michael “Mick” Chambers (1947-2010)
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Block/PC (video) JetMetFan Basketball 22 Mon Mar 10, 2014 09:09am
Block/PC + Positioning (video) JetMetFan Basketball 27 Sat Mar 08, 2014 09:54pm
Block or PC (video) JetMetFan Basketball 8 Thu Mar 06, 2014 08:57pm
Block/Charge video ballgame99 Basketball 27 Sat Aug 31, 2013 09:51am
OU vs OSU block on OU LB video BoBo Football 0 Mon Dec 01, 2008 11:32am


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:09pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1