Michigan/Purdue...block/PC (video request)

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by johnny d

This is a pc foul. More importantly, this play is one of the exceptions to the RA. Player got an offensive rebound and immediately drove to the basket. There are no secondary defenders on this play. The fact that defender establishes in the RA is irrelevant.

Lots of guys commenting today without rules backing, is everybody hitting the St. Patrick's day parades and then coming here?

For that rule to apply can the offensive player dribble?
There are some particulars which need to be defined for the offensive rebound situation.
For example, how far away can the rebounder come from? I don't believe that the NCAA provides a distance, but it needs be near the RA.
You can't have a long rebound to the top of the key, then a drive down the lane and a crash in the RA be a PC.

[johnny d]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

For that rule to apply can the offensive player dribble?
There are some particulars which need to be defined for the offensive rebound situation.
For example, how far away can the rebounder come from? I don't believe that the NCAA provides a distance, but it needs be near the RA.
You can't have a long rebound to the top of the key, then a drive down the lane and a crash in the RA be a PC.

Sorry to disappoint you, but yes it can be. Please see AR 100. Player A1 attempts a shot which bounces off the rim and is rebounded by A2.

Player A2, who is located on the wing just inside the three point line gains possession of a long rebound and immediately drives to the basket with no defender. Player A2 crashes into the torso of B2 who is located within the RA.

Ruling: When B2 has established and maintained lgp, and illegal contact occurs it is a pc/charging foul on A2

As you can see, distance from the basket has no bearing on this exception.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by johnny d

Sorry to disappoint you, but yes it can be. Please see AR 100. Player A1 attempts a shot which bounces off the rim and is rebounded by A2.

Player A2, who is located on the wing just inside the three point line gains possession of a long rebound and immediately drives to the basket with no defender. Player A2 crashes into the torso of B2 who is located within the RA.

Ruling: When B2 has established and maintained lgp, and illegal contact occurs it is a pc/charging foul on A2

As you can see, distance from the basket has no bearing on this exception.

So is the 3pt line the line of demarcation or is there no distance defined by the NCAA? I ask because on this play the rebounder was outside the 3pt line. He also had a defender who ran past him in an attempt to reach the ball. Does he count as the primary defender? The NCAA AR states that there is no defender on the rebounder.

[johnny d]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

So is the 3pt line the line of demarcation or is there no distance defined by the NCAA? I ask because on this play the rebounder was outside the 3pt line. He also had a defender who ran past him in an attempt to reach the ball. Does he count as the primary defender? The NCAA AR states that there is no defender on the rebounder.

I would say there is no limit on the distance of the rebound, it can occur beyond the three point line as well.

I would not under any definition consider the defensive player that was trying to get the ball a primary defender. Before the white player possess the ball, neither team can be considered offense or defense. When the white player does gain possession and become and offensive player, the opponent is clearly behind him. It would be a stretch to consider him a primary defender.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by johnny d

I would say there is no limit on the distance of the rebound, it can occur beyond the three point line as well.

I would not under any definition consider the defensive player that was trying to get the ball a primary defender. Before the white player possess the ball, neither team can be considered offense or defense. When the white player does gain possession and become and offensive player, the opponent is clearly behind him. It would be a stretch to consider him a primary defender.

Thank you for your help with this ruling.
I've come to the conclusion that this rule needs better definition by the NCAA. The officials do not have clear enough parameters to use in such situations.
I would like to see the NCAA limit this to situations in which the offensive player does not dribble or the rebounder gains possession with at least one foot in the FT lane. Under those circumstances the NCAA could state that the RA does not apply.

[johnny d]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Thank you for your help with this ruling.
I've come to the conclusion that this rule needs better definition by the NCAA. The officials do not have clear enough parameters to use in such situations.
I would like to see the NCAA limit this to situations in which the offensive player does not dribble or the rebounder gains possession with at least one foot in the FT lane. Under those circumstances the NCAA could state that the RA does not apply.

You might be right, the rule as written leaves the potential for some pretty strange plays.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by johnny d

You might be right, the rule as written leaves the potential for some pretty strange plays.

Exactly, I wouldn't even think of this being an immediate drive.

He caught the ball going away from the basket, stopped briefly, then turned back the the basket for a drive.

#34 was defending white 44 and only shifted over as the shooter drove to the basket. That, to me, with the actions of this shooter, is a secondary defender, even with the AR you posted considered.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Thank you for your help with this ruling.
I've come to the conclusion that this rule needs better definition by the NCAA. The officials do not have clear enough parameters to use in such situations.
I would like to see the NCAA limit this to situations in which the offensive player does not dribble or the rebounder gains possession with at least one foot in the FT lane. Under those circumstances the NCAA could state that the RA does not apply.

I think that's part of the reason NCAAW went to the LDB concept -- it helps set the "distance" for such a play -- and similar plays to this had some discussion in the year prior to the change.