Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.
Old School:
4) I repeat: Time and distance does NOT apply when obtaining/establishing a legal guarding position against an offensive player who is not airborne when he gains control of the ball.
5) The Act of Shooting and Continuous Motion have nothing to do with obtaining/establishing a legal guarding postition.
Your lack of rules knowledge translates directly proportinal to your ability to correctly officiate the game.
MTD, Sr.
|
You know I was actually going to let this go and take my lumps and move on because I know I can not change the way most of you are viewing this play. However, like most of the rest of you. You have been drinking a little too much of that kool-aid. You have a one-track mind, you only see one side of the story, the defense. However, I do appreciate you sharing your thoughts with me because at least you stuck to your point, and not digress to insults which tells me a lot of about you, and there's hope for you. Also, I think you did better without the book then with it. Your points are very clear, especially the time and distance. However, I think you should have went for the hot tub.
Here's the reason why.
Rule 4-23-2a. To obtain LGP the guard must have both feet touching the playing court. When you view the tape frame by frame, you can't tell (and this is after the fact) if the guard got his second (left) foot to the floor, before the shooter picked his foot up and became airborne. It's too close to call. And if I can't tell from the video afterwards, then sure as hell, you can't determine this either in real time. So here in lies my point. The official viewed the play one-way and reason that all the defender has to do is get there, like you so well put it, there is no time and distance. Instead of judging the play, this official made a rulebook call. He's set, offense! He disregarded all the other factors around him, like the player with the ball.
I'm going to give you two examples: Not an absolute but food for thought.
#1.) In baseball, we have a term that all baseball players know. It's call "tie goes to the runner!" If the base-runner gets to the bag at the precise time that the first baseman catches the ball, it's a tie, SAFE!
Now in our situation, we have
Rule 4-27-2 ...contact which may result when opponents are in equally favorable positions to perform normal defensive or offensive movements should not be considered illegal even though the contact is severe. My point is, you can not dismiss the offensive player here. Your call in real time should be closer to this then a charge because this is closer to what actually happened, imho. And, I'm not splitting the atom today. It's too close to call, I got a tie. Tie goes to the runner. Unfortunately, this is not baseball.
#2.) If, in the NCAA tournament or any conference playoff's leading to the big dance. If an official, calls a charge in this situation. Guaranteed, he ain't going any further in the playoff's. Scratch his name off the list. That's why you would never see that call made in college, especially men. In college, that's either a no-call or a block. You make that game deciding call in college, you be watching the rest of the playoff's from the sideline.
This doesn't have anything to do with me, or my ability to call a game. If you believe that my voice is so bad for basketball that it should be silence, than there is something wrong with you. My call, block, count the bucket, we're going home and I'm going to the next round of the playoff's. You will be going back home to study your rulebook more and learn when to apply the rule and when to apply judgment. It's in there somewhere, just keep reading, you'll find it. Don't worry about me, because I will on the court, block! Good call ref!