Quote:
Originally posted by blindzebra
Quote:
Originally posted by Camron Rust
Quote:
Originally posted by blindzebra
Quote:
Originally posted by Camron Rust
I agree with Mark, in a sense....shoot me now.
You can not have a block and a charge at the same time. Torso-to-torso contact is the same contact...it can only be one thing. The casebook play is to cover the situation when two officials disagree about which it is.
However, you can have a player control foul (not a charge) and a block, hold, hit, etc. at the same time.
A1 hooks B1 at the same time as B1 smack A1 in the face.
A1 runs into B1's extended knee as A1 stiffarms B1 in the shoulder.
Remember that double fouls occur at "approximately" the same time, not exactly the same time.
|
Read 4-7-2 again:
Charging is illegal personal contact caused by PUSHING or moving into an opponent's torso.
It does not say torso to torso contact, a chicken wing clear out IS A CHARGE by definition.
|
A chicken wing clearout is illegal use of hands/arms, holding, or a push, not a charge....all still a player control foul though. A charge is pushing [with the body] into the opponents torso...otherwise, it's just a push.
If the contact is with some part of the dribbler other than his body, a block is not a relevant option. How can you block the dribblers arm? You can hold it or hit it but you can't block it.
|
Where does it say that this push cannot be with the arm, shoulder, top of the head, or rear end? The definition says pushing or moving into an opponents torso. You are reading into it only what you want.
|
You're right, it doesn't explicity say that. But, if A1 has his arm extended into B1's torso, how could you argue the other side that it could also be a block.
If it's body to body, it's either a block (no LGP) or a charge (LGP).
If it's not body to body, it can't be both.