Duke @ Louisville Transition Block Called by Lead

[DrPete]

I like to see the "big boys" miss these calls occasionally, it makes me not feel so bad when I second guess my own questionable calls.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[ChuckS]

Originally Posted by DrPete

I like to see the "big boys" miss these calls occasionally, it makes me not feel so bad when I second guess my own questionable calls.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I felt the same way last week in the Iowa St/Texas game, 2:57 to go, there was a throw-in after a made basket. The defender kicked the throw-in pass OOB. The official indicated that the next throw-in was to be a designated spot throw-in. The other official had to come running in to correct him, that they could still run the end line. (Of course, 1 mistake by NCAA officials, does not make up for all my 1st year mistakes LOL).

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by DrPete

I like to see the "big boys" miss these calls occasionally, it makes me not feel so bad when I second guess my own questionable calls.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Unfortunately, it seems to too often be the case that these plays just get called this way. By what we too often observe, it seems that there is a large number of officials that just think the defender has to be "set" to draw a charge.

[Raymond]

I have a PC by a non-airborne offensive player.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Unfortunately, it seems to too often be the case that these plays just get called this way. By what we too often observer, it seems that there is a large number of officials that just think the defender has to be "set" to draw a charge.

I really don't think so. I think that some calls just get missed. There are a LOT of PC fouls called in HS/college basketball, so many more than when I started back in the 1980s when it seemed the default call was always a block.

Sometimes I think we do a good job of refereeing the defense but don't always pick up when the offensive player is airborne, which is just as important. Couple that with an L trying to get in position....and maybe he just missed one.

[Dad]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Unfortunately, it seems to too often be the case that these plays just get called this way. By what we too often observer, it seems that there is a large number of officials that just think the defender has to be "set" to draw a charge.

Do you think that's an issue at this level?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Unfortunately, it seems to too often be the case that these plays just get called this way. By what we too often observer, it seems that there is a large number of officials that just think the defender has to be "set" to draw a charge.

I think this is the default call for many officials and if we look at the mentality of most people in the game (not officials) they think any call like this should be on the defender.

I also think that he probably was not "refereeing the defense" and the contact blew up on him and he called what he knew and called a block. I do not think the rule has much to do with this call. I think he called what was "safe" and calling a charge in this situation usually brings more scrutiny.

And if you listen to a few of the videos I posted recently, Jay Bilas feels the exact same way about most of these plays. That is why when I call a block on any play like this, I hear the same rhetoric about what the defender did not do. It is not so much about the rule as it is about what are you going to get crap about and scrutinized.

Peace

[SNIPERBBB]

I've hard some officials around home that you'll get less grief calling a block than a charge. Which is largely true unfortunately.

[ballgame99]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

It is not so much about the rule as it is about what are you going to get crap about and scrutinized.

Absolutely! I had a fairly senior official tell me this point blank this season. I called a travel on a play where the "traveler" got hammered after he left the floor (not enough to be flagrant or anything, just a hard foul), I came out with my travel and his coach came unglued. In the locker room my partner said I should have called the foul just because it would have kept me out of "trouble". I also think this is why you get as many 'looks funny' travels because its just easier to go ahead and call those than to explain why it wasn't.

[Dad]

Originally Posted by ballgame99

Absolutely! I had a fairly senior official tell me this point blank this season. I called a travel on a play where the "traveler" got hammered after he left the floor (not enough to be flagrant or anything, just a hard foul), I came out with my travel and his coach came unglued. In the locker room my partner said I should have called the foul just because it would have kept me out of "trouble". I also think this is why you get as many 'looks funny' travels because its just easier to go ahead and call those than to explain why it wasn't.

What does this mean?

If the travel happened first I'll call it. If the travel happened after a foul I'll call the foul. I don't know what "trouble" is but I don't think you should buy into it.

[Bad Zebra]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I think this is the default call for many officials and if we look at the mentality of most people in the game (not officials) they think any call like this should be on the defender.

I also think that he probably was not "refereeing the defense" and the contact blew up on him and he called what he knew and called a block. I do not think the rule has much to do with this call. I think he called what was "safe" and calling a charge in this situation usually brings more scrutiny.

And if you listen to a few of the videos I posted recently, Jay Bilas feels the exact same way about most of these plays. That is why when I call a block on any play like this, I hear the same rhetoric about what the defender did not do. It is not so much about the rule as it is about what are you going to get crap about and scrutinized.

Peace

In this official's defense...full speed, transition, close-up floor level view...he made a split second decision. I don't think it's a default position to call block here. Quite possibly he didn't think defender was legal (again at full speed in real time). I can live with this one...hardly what I'd consider a "bad" call.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Bad Zebra

In this official's defense...full speed, transition, close-up floor level view...he made a split second decision. I don't think it's a default position to call block here. Quite possibly he didn't think defender was legal (again at full speed in real time). I can live with this one...hardly what I'd consider a "bad" call.

I do not dispute any of this. This is not always an easy play. I just think that this more than likely blew up on him rather than him ignoring the rule or not knowing the rule as suggested by someone else.

I am sure I have messed up this call too in some situations. Calling this while running fast is not always the best way to get these calls right.

Peace

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Bad Zebra

In this official's defense...full speed, transition, close-up floor level view...he made a split second decision. I don't think it's a default position to call block here. Quite possibly he didn't think defender was legal (again at full speed in real time). I can live with this one...hardly what I'd consider a "bad" call.

I see his left arm start to come out as he heads to the table (but then the camera cuts away) -- maybe he had the defender in the arc. (I only watched it once, and I was multi-tasking, so ...)