Two Block/Charge Plays (Video)

[bob jenkins]

I go with Block, Charge

[JetMetFan]

I have both plays as PC fouls. In #1 the BH/D never gets head and shoulders past the defender, meaning the onus is on the BH/D to avoid contact. Same deal for #2, assuming there was contact.

In #2 I'm assuming there was a turnover and the new L got stuck but he still needed to bust it to get to the end line. It appears he made up his mind - or his legs made up his mind for him - that he wasn't going to get to the end line in time about two steps over the division line.

Of course, his physical condition looks much better than that of the new T. I'm sure it sounds like I'm trying to hate but as a guy who shed 45 lbs. since the start of 2013 I'm speaking from experience. It's hard officiating 17-year-old when you're carrying too much baggage.

[deecee]

charge, charge.

in each instance i ask myself what did the defense do wrong? nothing.

Both the contacts were straight through the chest and neither involved a player going airborne so looked like defense got to the spot first and had lgp.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Charge and Charge!

MTD, Sr.

[Hugh Refner]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Charge and Charge!

MTD, Sr.

+infinity

[JugglingReferee]

PC and PC.

Although in the second clip, I'm not certain, becuase of the camera angle, how much contact there was. If there was some embellishment, I can see a "play-on" no-call.

[JRutledge]

First one looks like a block. The defender is coming towards the ball handler at the time of contact.

The second one looks like a PC mostly, but I cannot tell if the defender is going forward to the ball handler or moving sideways. But it appears to be PC for the most part.

Peace

[JetMetFan]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

First one looks like a block. The defender is coming towards the ball handler at the time of contact.

JRut, looks like the defender's right foot is moving backwards at point of contact, no?

Originally Posted by ballgame99

Play 1 is a bad angle, but that looks like a block to me, no LGP as the defender was still sliding into offensive player at contact.

Regardless of whether you rule block or PC, what does "sliding into" mean?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by JetMetFan

JRut, looks like the defender's right foot is moving backwards at point of contact, no?

I looks to me like he is coming forward towards the opponent. Now I said looks like as to suggest it is possible he is not. But the angle and the way he falls is also suspect. And I am one that usually defaults to PC fouls in these situations. I am not dismissing your point, I just do not see what you are seeing.

Peace

[ballgame99]

Originally Posted by JetMetFan

Regardless of whether you rule block or PC, what does "sliding into" mean?

You know what it means; he is moving laterally in an attempt to maintain LGP but doesn't stay in front of the offensive player. Plus his feet aren't "set"

[JetMetFan]

Originally Posted by ballgame99

You know what it means; he is moving laterally in an attempt to maintain LGP but doesn't stay in front of the offensive player. Plus his feet aren't "set"

Trouble maker...

[IUgrad92]

#1 Block. B1 tries beating A1 to a spot but contact occurs before B1 established LGP.

#2 Charge. If these two plays happened in sequence, it is possible L went block to stay consistent with play #1, especially if he considered it a 50/50 play.