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

8:11 remaining in 1st half. Block/PC play on Purdue's offensive end. L looked like he changed his mind in mid-call.

So, again, I reply to myself :)

This one looks to have had RA qualities as well.


<iframe width="960" height="720" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/1yh0J6WnXyk?rel=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

That's easily an RA play and if I look at it on a bigger screen probably a block anyway.

Sent from my SPH-L900 using Tapatalk

His heels are over the the line of the RA arc. It's a block.

TV Ted definitely signaled PC first and then switched to banging his hips repeatedly.

Without the RA, I think it's a PC.

And You Don't Mess Around With Jim (Jim Croce, 1972) ...
 

Heh? That's my Forum "thing". Tread carefully my friend.

Big screen edit:

Yes RA, no it wouldn't have been a block.

If CBS had kept the wide angle I think we might have seen him point at the RA.

Agree....without the RA, a PC. But it was in the RA, thus a block.

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.

I don't think this play qualifies as a rebound with an immediate drive.

Sent from my SPH-L900 using Tapatalk

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.

It most certainly is. The offensive player controls the ball, turns towards the basket and drives into the lane without hesitation. Just because he did not get the ball while it was in the air and he was facing the basket does not mean he did not immediately drive to the basket once he established possession.

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.

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.

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.

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.

According to the exception to the RA rule, spelled out in the AR, this part is irrelevant. On most, if not all of the plays, especially ones like the AR, the defender involved in the contact will have been guarding another player while or before the move to the basket started.

If you want to argue the white player did not make an immediate move to the basket, so be it. I would disagree, but by rule, that is the only argument you can make. Once one has decided that the white player did indeed make an immediate move to the basket, then who the defensive player involved in the contact may or may not have been defending is not a factor in adjudicating this play correctly.

It's not addressed, so we do not know if it is relevant or not.

It is addressed directly in the rule. "After an offensive rebound, there are no secondary defenders when the rebounder makes an immediate move to the basket."

None of the defenders, regardless of what they are doing at the time the rebounder makes his move to the basket, are to be considered secondary defenders. Seems pretty unambiguous to me.

But what is an immediate move. I picture it as catching the rebound and, in one motion, going to the basket. If there is a pause or reversal of direction, I wouldn't consider that immediate.

RA block.