The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Sat Feb 04, 2017, 09:27pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 76
Is there still be a belief by some officials that the defender has to "take the contact" in order to have a charge?
We must rid the earth of such thinking!
__________________
"Coach, that was an easy call for me to make"
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Sat Feb 04, 2017, 09:33pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Baton Rouge
Posts: 61
Agreed!
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Sat Feb 04, 2017, 09:33pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 3,505
IT should have been a charge. However how they adjudicated was correct. The offensive player was in his shooting motion at the time of the foul so the basket counts, then adjudicate the penalty for the block.
__________________
in OS I trust
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Sat Feb 04, 2017, 09:54pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 734
Quote:
Originally Posted by deecee View Post
IT should have been a charge. However how they adjudicated was correct. The offensive player was in his shooting motion at the time of the foul so the basket counts, then adjudicate the penalty for the block.
Pause at first contact: ball is still in air toward the shooter. (And yes, I realize they don't get to do that and it's a really tough call to make live.)
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Sat Feb 04, 2017, 10:43pm
CJP CJP is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 275
I think these guys screwed this up, big time. Got the block/charge wrong and then made an error by awarding 2 points. Even if it was a block, the basket shouldn't have counted.
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Sat Feb 04, 2017, 11:52pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Earth- For Now
Posts: 872
Quote:
Originally Posted by CJP View Post
I think these guys screwed this up, big time. Got the block/charge wrong and then made an error by awarding 2 points. Even if it was a block, the basket shouldn't have counted.
I think its a very poor sequence for this crew.

Would love to have seen the coach's reaction.
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Sun Feb 05, 2017, 12:37pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 683
Well I might get torn apart for it, but I'll go to bat for the lead just a little bit here. While I do still think it was a charge after several viewings, I also think it would be interesting to see an endline angle, which obviously is unavailable. Just before contact, W11 runs directly between the players and the camera angle, and just as he gets out of the way, the contact is occurring, and the kid who took the "charge" has his right leg at a weird angle outside of his frame, whereas it didn't look like that before the view is interrupted. This could imply that he was, in fact, sliding to his left at the time of impact. (Although I do acknowledge that his could be part of him bracing for contact as well, as I said, I'd love to have an unobstructed angle of the full play)

I realize I'm analyzing this too far, and as I said, I still think it was a charge, but the more I've watched it, the less certain I think I am-
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Mon Feb 06, 2017, 09:48am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Virginia
Posts: 546
Quote:
Originally Posted by frezer11 View Post
Well I might get torn apart for it, but I'll go to bat for the lead just a little bit here. While I do still think it was a charge after several viewings, I also think it would be interesting to see an endline angle, which obviously is unavailable. Just before contact, W11 runs directly between the players and the camera angle, and just as he gets out of the way, the contact is occurring, and the kid who took the "charge" has his right leg at a weird angle outside of his frame, whereas it didn't look like that before the view is interrupted. This could imply that he was, in fact, sliding to his left at the time of impact. (Although I do acknowledge that his could be part of him bracing for contact as well, as I said, I'd love to have an unobstructed angle of the full play)

I realize I'm analyzing this too far, and as I said, I still think it was a charge, but the more I've watched it, the less certain I think I am-
I agree with you. I have a charge from our angle, but it's possible that the defender's leg may be extended outside his vertical frame. I'm not going to say that the video is 100% conclusive.
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Mon Feb 06, 2017, 09:32am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by so cal lurker View Post
Pause at first contact: ball is still in air toward the shooter. (And yes, I realize they don't get to do that and it's a really tough call to make live.)
The easy, and CORRECT call, is to wave off the basket. What we really have here is a team control foul and the basket should not have counted as the contact occurred before the shooter is even going up. To count this basket is terrible officiating.

Unless he clearly got the shot off before the contact, this is an easy basket to wave off.
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Mon Feb 06, 2017, 12:19pm
9 times
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: St. George, UT
Posts: 777
Quote:
Originally Posted by SD Referee View Post
The easy, and CORRECT call, is to wave off the basket. What we really have here is a team control foul and the basket should not have counted as the contact occurred before the shooter is even going up. To count this basket is terrible officiating.

Unless he clearly got the shot off before the contact, this is an easy basket to wave off.
I talked with the cc about this very thing. After seeing the video, he agreed.
__________________
Get it right!

1999 (2x), 2006, 2008, 2010, 2012, 2014, 2016, 2019
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Mon Feb 06, 2017, 09:04am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 1,226
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawkeyes View Post
Is there still be a belief by some officials that the defender has to "take the contact" in order to have a charge?
We must rid the earth of such thinking!
Explain for the casual observer, please!
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old Mon Feb 06, 2017, 09:18am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 18,186
Quote:
Originally Posted by bossman72 View Post
Explain for the casual observer, please!
Some would say:

"If the defender is moving backwards, it's not a charge."

"If the defender doesn't get run over, it's not a charge."

"The offense must go 'to and through' the defender to be a charge."

"If the offense alters the path slightly so the contact is shoulder-to-shoulder and not torso-to-torso, it's not a charge."
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old Wed Feb 08, 2017, 12:27pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 690
Quote:
Originally Posted by bob jenkins View Post
Some would say:

"The offense must go 'to and through' the defender to be a charge."
I understand where you are coming from on the other platitudes (if I'm using that word correctly), but what is about "to and through" that you don't like, specifically?
__________________
Things turn out best for people who make the best of the way things turn out.
-- John Wooden
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old Wed Feb 08, 2017, 01:20pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 683
Quote:
Originally Posted by A Pennsylvania Coach View Post
I understand where you are coming from on the other platitudes (if I'm using that word correctly), but what is about "to and through" that you don't like, specifically?
I know the question was not directed to me, but "to and through" has nothing to do with the rule. That phrase often implies that it is required for the offensive player to drive through the defender, and put them on the ground for it to be a foul. If there is legal guarding position and sufficient contact to cause displacement, then it should be an offensive foul. I've called charges where the defender remained standing and the offensive player was on the ground before (though these are typically better left as a no-call).
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old Wed Feb 08, 2017, 02:42pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 18,186
Quote:
Originally Posted by frezer11 View Post
I know the question was not directed to me, but "to and through" has nothing to do with the rule. That phrase often implies that it is required for the offensive player to drive through the defender, and put them on the ground for it to be a foul. If there is legal guarding position and sufficient contact to cause displacement, then it should be an offensive foul.
Basically, this.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Block / Charge Jumpshooter40 Basketball 10 Mon Jan 13, 2014 11:36pm
Charge vs Block Jumpshooter40 Basketball 8 Mon Jan 06, 2014 07:37pm
Block/charge JeroenB Basketball 28 Tue Dec 11, 2012 06:31am
Block/Charge drinkeii Basketball 16 Thu Dec 19, 2002 01:05am
block/charge wolfe44 Basketball 11 Thu Dec 12, 2002 09:29am


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:09pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1