High School State Finals (Video)

[Rich]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

I'm not 100% sure, but I lean towards "blocK". It looks like the defender is moving sideways, but not obliquely, into the path of the shooter upon contact. From the center's angle he may see otherwise, though, so I'm not up in arms over the call.

Except.....he has two feet down in the path of the offensive player before he's airborne. No time/distance requirement. Big fan of this call, if not the mechanic.

[BryanV21]

Originally Posted by Rich

Except.....he has two feet down in the path of the offensive player before he's airborne. No time/distance requirement. Big fan of this call, if not the mechanic.

The rule says the defender must move sideways or obliquely to maintain LGP. Which, to me, means in such a way as to not be moving towards or into the path of the shooter/dribbler. There is certainly movement by the defender, I'm just not sure it is legal movement.

Sent from my SM-G925V using Tapatalk

[Rich]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

The rule says the defender must move sideways or obliquely to maintain LGP. Which, to me, means in such a way as to not be moving towards or into the path of the shooter/dribbler. There is certainly movement by the defender, I'm just not sure it is legal movement.

Sent from my SM-G925V using Tapatalk

I'm not talking about maintaining. I'm talking about establishing.

[BryanV21]

Originally Posted by Rich

I'm not talking about maintaining. I'm talking about establishing.

Oh, I never said he didn't establish it. Or I didn't mean to. Just that I'm not sure he maintained it before contact.

[Rich]

I'm happy with the defense on this play. Playing defense is hard and I think too many officials look for a reason to say a defender is illegal.

Edited to add: I do not think the defender is moving in any illegal (read: forward) way at the point of contact.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

The rule says the defender must move sideways or obliquely to maintain LGP. Which, to me, means in such a way as to not be moving towards or into the path of the shooter/dribbler. There is certainly movement by the defender, I'm just not sure it is legal movement.

Sent from my SM-G925V using Tapatalk

Moving towards is certainly not allowed, but moving sideways is exactly what is allowed. Until the shooter leaves the floor, the defender has the right to continue sideways movement...what you seem to be calling "into the path". He was already in the path long before that....when they were about 15 feet apart. After that, he was moving to maintain a position in the path, i.e. LGP.

[Rich]

That was my point.

But as long as gets two feet down in the path prior to contact and prior to the offensive player going airborne, it generally can't be a defensive foul unless the player is moving forward.

Even if he didn't have LGP, he would've established it prior to contact.

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by Rich

I'm happy with the defense on this play. Playing defense is hard and I think too many officials look for a reason to say a defender is illegal.

Edited to add: I do not think the defender is moving in any illegal (read: forward) way at the point of contact.

Agree.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Moving towards is certainly not allowed, but moving sideways is exactly what is allowed. Until the shooter leaves the floor, the defender has the right to continue sideways movement...what you seem to be calling "into the path". He was already in the path long before that....when they were about 15 feet apart. After that, he was moving to maintain a position in the path, i.e. LGP.

I concur. This is a textbook charging foul (PC).
Bryan doesn't understand legal defensive movement. The offensive player is not airborne at the time of contact, so the defender is permitted by rule to be moving sideways. Had the offensive player left the floor, the defender would need to stop sliding to his left.

[BryanV21]

Without doing the freezeframe thing, it looked like the defender took another step sideways (right before contact his left foot moves another few inches to his left) into the shooter. Sideways or lateral movement is allowed provided it's not towards the opponent when contact occurs.

By pausing and going frame by frame (as best I can, at least), it does look like the defender's left foot touches the floor before contact. Therefore, the defender did not move sideways into the shooter. Basically, the defender beat him to the spot.

BTW, I understand LGP and how to maintain it. I'm just not somebody that is going to give the benefit of the doubt to the defense. It's like in baseball... either the runner is out or the runner is safe. There's no "well, the shortstop made a great stop and throw, so I'm going to give him the benefit of the doubt and call the runner out". Doing that is a cop-out. Not that the call is easy to make, but it should come down to how you saw the play, not whether playing defense is hard or not.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

Without doing the freezeframe thing, it looked like the defender took another step sideways (right before contact his left foot moves another few inches to his left) into the shooter. Sideways or lateral movement is allowed provided it's not towards the opponent when contact occurs.

By pausing and going frame by frame (as best I can, at least), it does look like the defender's left foot touches the floor before contact. Therefore, the defender did not move sideways into the shooter. Basically, the defender beat him to the spot.

BTW, I understand LGP and how to maintain it.....

By your description, you're not.

Whether his foot touches the floor or not just before contact is completely irrelevant. He had LGP well before that time with both feet down. He does not have to get them both back down before contact.

You keep saying something about moving "into the shooter". That defender was moving towards the endline with every step he took. Unless the shooter got by him, there was no way he was "moving into the shooter". I think you're confusing moving to stay in the shooter's path (legal) with moving into the shooter (not legal).

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

The rule says the defender must move sideways or obliquely to maintain LGP. Which, to me, means in such a way as to not be moving towards or into the path of the shooter/dribbler. There is certainly movement by the defender, I'm just not sure it is legal movement.

As Camron Rust and I have told you, you are misapplying the rules on this type of play. Please take a look at Play #4 in this other thread for another example.

https://forum.officiating.com/basket...est-video.html

The offensive player is not yet airborne and the defender is definitely moving sideways at the time of contact. This is legal defensive movement.

[BryanV21]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

As Camron Rust and I have told you, you are misapplying the rules on this type of play. Please take a look at Play #4 in this other thread for another example.

https://forum.officiating.com/basket...est-video.html

The offensive player is not yet airborne and the defender is definitely moving sideways at the time of contact. This is legal defensive movement.

So you're telling me 4-23-3c, particularly the part about the guard being able to move laterally or obliquely, provided it is not toward the opponent when contact occurs, does not apply?

Sent from my SM-G925V using Tapatalk

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

So you're telling me 4-23-3c, particularly the part about the guard being able to move laterally or obliquely, provided it is not toward the opponent when contact occurs, does not apply?

Just the opposite. I'm telling you that it applies and is exactly what makes the defender's movement in these two plays legal. You are misapplying this rule because you are equating sideways movement to movement towards the shooter. That isn't correct. FORWARD movement by the defender is movement towards the shooter and is illegal at the time of contact. The rule specifically states that lateral (sideways) or oblique (at an angle) movement by the defender is allowed, yet you are penalizing the defender for that. That is where you are mistaken.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

So you're telling me 4-23-3c, particularly the part about the guard being able to move laterally or obliquely, provided it is not toward the opponent when contact occurs, does not apply?

Sent from my SM-G925V using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Just the opposite. I'm telling you that it applies and is exactly what makes the defender's movement in these two plays legal. You are misapplying this rule because you are equating sideways movement to movement towards the shooter. That isn't correct. FORWARD movement by the defender is movement towards the shooter and is illegal at the time of contact. The rule specifically states that lateral (sideways) or oblique (at an angle) movement by the defender is allowed, yet you are penalizing the defender for that. That is where you are mistaken.

Exactly.

For sideways movement to be "into the shooter" the shooter would have to reach a spot on the side of the defender before contact. The contact on such a play would be on the defender's side and not on the front of the defender's torso.

On a play where the offensive player has not jumped, the contact is on the front of the defender's torso, the defender obtained LGP (previously) and is NOT stepping forwards, the defender has a legal position and can not commit a block.