Iowa @ Penn State - Shooting Foul (Video)

[JRutledge]

Peace

[bballref3966]

Defender was legal before the shooter left the floor and did not violate verticality.

Not a foul, IMO.

[deecee]

Eh, it's a tie. That goes to the offense. Ideally a no call would be better but I'm guessing that was a body took a weird spill and ate it call, so in the grand scheme of things not awful.

[Adam]

I don't understand the rules of the arc, but is this a secondary defender?

[deecee]

Originally Posted by Adam

I don't understand the rules of the arc, but is this a secondary defender?

Yes this is a secondary defender. The arc rule applies in block charges.

[#olderthanilook]

Not sure about college rules, but does A1 get his head and shoulders past the torso of the B1 in this play?

4-7-2b. If a guard has obtained a legal guarding position, the player with the ball must get his/her head and shoulders past the torso of the defensive player. If contact occurs on the torso of the defensive player, the dribbler is responsible for the contact.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Adam

I don't understand the rules of the arc, but is this a secondary defender?

Yes this could apply, but I am wondering if this should have even been called?

Peace

[jpgc99]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Yes this could apply, but I am wondering if this should have even been called?

Peace

Watching on the small screen on my phone I have a RA block.

[JetMetFan]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Yes this could apply, but I am wondering if this should have even been called?

Peace

I'm with you. I happened to see it live and didn't think it was a foul. I still don't, though it would be an RA block if it was. The play looked ugly and awkward but that doesn't = illegal.

[Raymond]

Huh? He made no attempt to block that shot. I have a block with no questions asked.

Sent from my SPH-L900 using Tapatalk

[deecee]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Huh? He made no attempt to block that shot. I have a block with no questions asked.

Sent from my SPH-L900 using Tapatalk

I'm not saying he did. The RA call is ONLY for block charges. I still don't think the contact warranted a foul. The call was more than likely because the offensive player took a funny spill as he lost the ball.

[johnny d]

Originally Posted by deecee

I'm not saying he did. The RA call is ONLY for block charges. I still don't think the contact warranted a foul. The call was more than likely because the offensive player took a funny spill as he lost the ball.

What are you talking about? This is exactly the type of play the RA is about. The secondary defender is trying to take a charge. He is not attempting to block the shot. This is either an RA block or a no call. And good luck trying to explain why you went with a no call if that is the path you chose. Defender cannot establish legal guarding position within the RA, therefore, the unless you believe the contact is incidental, which it isn't, then you have to call a block foul. If you really think the RA doesn't apply in the situation in this video, you need to get back in the rule book, talk to some officials with more NCAA-M experience than you have, and watch some of the archived videos on the NCAA-M arbiter site.

[Camron Rust]

I have a block with or without the RA.

The defender never got LGP. He got in the path and got two feet down, but didn't face the opponent....thus no LGP. And, the contact was on his side. The player didn't get to the spot first legally and displaced the shooter. Thus, it is a block.

[deecee]

I should have watched the slo motion replays instead of stopping after the real time one. It's a good call. It's a block in any circumstance.

An RA call is usually done when an official would normally have a PC foul. Point to the RA and call a block. At least that's my understanding of the mechanic.

[bob jenkins]

Defender is still straightening up / moving forward with the body when the offense leaves the ground.