No call or block. Shooter gets the whole right side of his body (arm and leg) past the defender before the slight contact occurs. If defender doesn't embellish then we have nothing to rule on. He caused the problem so its probably why he got the block in this case.

(And I'm an OU grad...)

This isn't how the rule works. At all. The offense ran into the defense. Defense didn't do anything wrong therefore didn't cause any problem. LGP can start the length of the entire court.

/thumbs up

Thank you for pointing that out.

I'm also refraining from making a conclusive judgement until I see a view the baseline camera. I will say, if I was the slot, I would want my cadence on the whistle to be a bit slower.....to allow the lead a first crack at this play.

Not relevant. If the defender had LGP and legally maintained it (I'm not convinced he did, yet), it can not be a block, by rule. The shooter getting partially past doesn't change that at all. The shooter getting partially past only means that the defender has basically lost the right to lateral movement since such movement would be towards the shooter.

I guess its also how you define "ran into".

Defense "didn't do anything wrong" BUT he did get the block foul.

There was a "problem".....and the official resolved it. Some here say it was done correctly...and some say incorrectly.

Bottom line: On Block/Charges, there are the obvious ones where 90% of officials agree and then there are the ones where officials split 50/50 or 60/40. Its all subjective applications of the rules...100% of officials will never agree.......fun to discuss though. :D

From this angle, it's a clear charge to me, but I'd rather have the view of the official who called.

I would feel best about calling the PC foul here (defense had two feet, facing before A1 was airbone). I have more of an educational question though: as the Lead in a block/charge play, what is the best positioning? What if the play is right in the middle of the key? Do you want to have a view "in between" A1 and B1 as much as possible? Do you want to get more of a straight-lined angle so you can judge the defense's leaning/verticality?

Yes. ;)

IOW, one of those views will be better than the other, but you won't know which until the play is over.

If you think C or T can help, then let them take the view from the side and L can take the view from behind. If not, then I'd prefer a little to the side, but you don't want to be way out wide by the 3-point line.

One thing this angle doesn't and can't reveal is whether the defender leaned to the side and into the shooter or not. That question could be seen clearly form the position of the C or the T...but not the trail (or this camera angle).

Some angles are better than others. Regardless of what position an official takes relative to the players, there is always one blind spot like this. When judging plays like this, the best position is not looking directly between the players as is the case in this video but is actually a straighlined position. That will show very clearly whether the defender leaned into the path or not. Of course, you give up the view of a lot of other possibilities which makes the straightlined position bad. The best position for a single official is thus one that is a diagonal look through the play....again not what we have in the video.

It would take unobstructed views from two angles on every block/charge similar to this play to know with certainty whether the defender was legal or not....one to judge forward movement (looking from the side) and one to judge lateral movement (looking from the back/front). If the defender satisfies both, then they are legal. But you sometimes can't see both from one spot.

Good points CR.....These 50/50...60/40 block charges are never cut and dry. I often catch the defender leaning into the offensive player (who is trying to slide by without creating contact ) effectively becoming illegal and becoming responsible for the contact. A lot of officials however still go Charge on those plays....but its hard for me to do so. Yep I'm THAT guy. :D

I think what makes this place difficult is how the defender 'rises' from his crouched defensive position just before contact. I do believe that this should have been a player control, but the defender rising just short of contact (despite having legal guarding position) gives the illusion that he never gained legal position.

I do think the official got it wrong but it was a difficult play when seen live.