Syracuse v Virginia RA play - Higgins

[CallMeMrRef]

Originally Posted by jpgc99

1) This is in the mechanics manual as others have pointed out. The mechanics manual tells us exactly what to do. If it is a block because the player is in the restricted area, point. This means you only point if it is a block because of the RA. The second point in the mechanics manual says, if it is judged a block solely due to the contact (regardless of location on the floor), you do not point.

Exactly what I am saying. I am going to put this in simple terms. Let's just take the bang bang play in the RA. I know it is in the RA and the tape will show it is in the RA - no question it is in the RA. - no partners will have to come in - they may actually reinforce that the play was in the RA. When I make the block call, due to it being in the RA, and point to the RA, I am saying, this play is a block because of where it happened. It does not indicate whether I thought it would have been a block or charge without the RA. There is no judgment to be questioned on the B/C, just on the location of the play. The coach then knows why this call is a block when the last call down the court was a charge on similar contact. It all gets back to communication - everybody knows what was called and why.

You all are saying that I can only point to the RA if I had made the decision it was a PC. I don't read it that way and will point to the RA in this situation unless my supervisors tell me otherwise.

If that is calculus, so be it.

[deecee]

You totally don't understand the purpose of the RA.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by CallMeMrRef

Exactly what I am saying. I am going to put this in simple terms. Let's just take the bang bang play in the RA. I know it is in the RA and the tape will show it is in the RA - no question it is in the RA. - no partners will have to come in - they may actually reinforce that the play was in the RA. When I make the block call, due to it being in the RA, and point to the RA, I am saying, this play is a block because of where it happened. It does not indicate whether I thought it would have been a block or charge without the RA. There is no judgment to be questioned on the B/C, just on the location of the play. The coach then knows why this call is a block when the last call down the court was a charge on similar contact. It all gets back to communication - everybody knows what was called and why.

You all are saying that I can only point to the RA if I had made the decision it was a PC. I don't read it that way and will point to the RA in this situation unless my supervisors tell me otherwise.

If that is calculus, so be it.

You yourself posted the CCA manual verbiage that told you that if you point to the RA the play would have been an offensive foul minus the restricted area Arc. How come you aren't responding to that? I can only suppose that you are either a troll, coach, or fan who is nowhere near close to officiating in college basketball.

You would be the kind of official who ruins camp for everybody else. There is no way in hell any college supervisor would hire somebody with this type of mentality so quit pretending you're a college official.

Sent from my SPH-L900 using Tapatalk

[dahoopref]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

You yourself posted the CCA manual verbiage that told you that if you point to the RA the play would have been an offensive foul minus the restricted area Arc. How come you aren't responding to that? I can only suppose that you are either a troll, coach, or fan who is nowhere near close to officiating in college basketball.

You would be the kind of official who ruins camp for everybody else. There is no way in hell any college supervisor would hire somebody with this type of mentality so quit pretending you're a college official.

Sent from my SPH-L900 using Tapatalk

Well, that day has finally arrived....

[Adam]

Originally Posted by CallMeMrRef

You all are saying that I can only point to the RA if I had made the decision it was a PC. I don't read it that way and will point to the RA in this situation unless my supervisors tell me otherwise.

Ok, we're shutting this down now.

They're all saying it because that's what a plain reading of the rule you quoted says.

This thread is closed.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by CallMeMrRef

I guess you guys have never had a block/charge play that was bang bang on a fast break that needs 4 of your fellow officials to review the film 5 time in slow motion to decide whether the play was a block or a charge. Then have one of those plays happen where you adjudicate it as an RA play and in that split second call a block solely because the defender was in the RA. Seems to me in that situation you would follow the signaling sequence and include both a block signal and point to the RA.

Now, suppose your interpretation of the RA play is wrong - say it was on a fast break, but it was actually 2 on 2 or 3 on 3 and your partner brings you that information since you indicated it was an RA play. Now you would have to do what we do on any other 50/50 play and come up with a call. That could be a block or that could be a charge.

Hence it is not necessarily true that if you call an RA play and point to the RA that you would have had a PC.

Splitting hairs, but I don't think you leap to stating something as fact that is not actually written in the books. I understand that approach works and holds true 98% of the time, but if that were the rule, then it would have been easy enough to put it in writing just as the block in any circumstance is in writing.

QED

You must be a camp favorite.

What's really amazing is that you brought the CCA manual into this conversation and now you're ignoring the words you actually quoted.

Sent from my SPH-L900 using Tapatalk

[JetMetFan]

Originally Posted by CallMeMrRef

I guess you guys have never had a block/charge play that was bang bang on a fast break that needs 4 of your fellow officials to review the film 5 time in slow motion to decide whether the play was a block or a charge. Then have one of those plays happen where you adjudicate it as an RA play and in that split second call a block solely because the defender was in the RA. Seems to me in that situation you would follow the signaling sequence and include both a block signal and point to the RA.

Now, suppose your interpretation of the RA play is wrong - say it was on a fast break, but it was actually 2 on 2 or 3 on 3 and your partner brings you that information since you indicated it was an RA play. Now you would have to do what we do on any other 50/50 play and come up with a call. That could be a block or that could be a charge.

Hence it is not necessarily true that if you call an RA play and point to the RA that you would have had a PC.

Splitting hairs, but I don't think you leap to stating something as fact that is not actually written in the books. I understand that approach works and holds true 98% of the time, but if that were the rule, then it would have been easy enough to put it in writing just as the block in any circumstance is in writing.

QED

Yes it is because that's what's written in the CCA manual. If you as the calling official don't point at the RA on the initial call your partners can also come in with information if necessary ("#xx on Team B established his/her guarding position in the RA" if your call was a PC or TC foul). If you call a block on your own without pointing, that call is all yours.

To borrow from a fellow official not in this Forum, you seem to be taking simple math - i.e., the line from the CCA manual - and turning it into calculus.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by CallMeMrRef

Now, suppose your interpretation of the RA play is wrong - say it was on a fast break, but it was actually 2 on 2 or 3 on 3 and your partner brings you that information since you indicated it was an RA play. Now you would have to do what we do on any other 50/50 play and come up with a call. That could be a block or that could be a charge.

No, it couldn't. It MUST be a charge. If you point you are saying "this is a CHARGE if it's not an RA, and a BLOCK if it is an RA." So, once your partner tells you it's not an RA -- you're left with no choice.

[deecee]

CallMeMrRef - you are wrong. The clue would be that you are the only salmon swimming downstream while the rest are going the other way.

Your quotes even prove you wrong. It's ok to be wrong.