Women's South Carolina @ Mizzou (Video)

[zm1283]

The only one I would even debate would be #2 just because of how light the contact really was, but I'm sure most of us have called that a PC foul before so I can't fault him.

I really like #3. I don't think it gets called enough at the high school level.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by zm1283

The only one I would even debate would be #2 just because of how light the contact really was, but I'm sure most of us have called that a PC foul before so I can't fault him.

I think this is a no-brainer call. I do not care how "light" the contact is. If that much contact takes place I am calling a foul. And I think the defender was clearly there to take the charge.

Originally Posted by zm1283

I really like #3. I don't think it gets called enough at the high school level.

I have called this and would call this if I saw it. You are not allowed to undercut a player and the player was bigger and got to the ball legally.

Peace

[Camron Rust]

All correct and good calls. Nice to have sequences of correct calls to see.

[ballgame99]

1) tough call to make at full speed, but looks correct.
2) 50/50. My initial reaction was the defender was coming forward, but not sure of that on replay.
3) the foul called is a foul, but I have a rebound foul before that. Pink had position and the big white player came through her space to get the rebound (ie didn't go vertical to use her height to get the rebound).

[Raymond]

Question NCAA-W's officials.

In play 2, wouldn't that still be the Trail primary coverage with the Lead following the ball out to the corner?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Question NCAA-W's officials.

In play 2, wouldn't that still be the Trail primary coverage with the Lead following the ball out to the corner?

Either can get it, but I like the L since the defender came off the player in the corner. There's no need for L to move his vision to the corner, yet.

[Dive Right]

I might not called #2 because the Mizzou player did not run through the set player. Is this correct? Thanks..

I'm new here and a new basketball official..so just looking to learn.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Dive Right

I might not called #2 because the Mizzou player did not run through the set player. Is this correct? Thanks..

I'm new here and a new basketball official..so just looking to learn.

Welcome to the forum. Displacement is all that is required, the defender was certainly displaced. It was a great call IMO.

Peace

[SC Official]

Originally Posted by Dive Right

I might not called #2 because the Mizzou player did not run through the set player. Is this correct? Thanks..

I'm new here and a new basketball official..so just looking to learn.

First thing to learn as a new official...take this word out of your vocabulary as it relates to block/charge plays.

In all seriousness, welcome.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Dive Right

I might not called #2 because the Mizzou player did not run through the set player. Is this correct? Thanks..

"To and through" is NOT a requirement.

It can make it difficult to tell whether the "TO" was sufficient for displacement / disadvantage or whether the defense flops. That's a skill you will get with time.