High School State Finals (Video)

[BryanV21]

When I see a dribbler trying to go around a guard, and that guard steps sideways into the shooter, I don't see how that is a charge.

That's what I thought I saw here before going frame by frame to see that the guard stepped sideways before contact with the dribbler/shooter occurred.

Sent from my SM-G925V using Tapatalk

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

When I see a dribbler trying to go around a guard, and that guard steps sideways into the shooter, I don't see how that is a charge.

That's what I thought I saw here before going frame by frame to see that the guard stepped sideways before contact with the dribbler/shooter occurred.

Sent from my SM-G925V using Tapatalk

It doesn't take frame-by-frame to see that. Where does the contact occur? Offense into the defender's torso or defender's side into the offense's side?

[BryanV21]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

It doesn't take frame-by-frame to see that. Where does the contact occur? Offense into the defender's torso or defender's side into the offense's side?

Good point. I was mainly just watching the defender.

Sent from my SM-G925V using Tapatalk

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

Good point. I was mainly just watching the defender.

That should make it more obvious, not less. Where on the defender does the contact occur? If the defender is moving is the contact on the part of the defender's body in the direction of movement? If so, block, if not, charge (or no call).

Examples:
Defender moving left, contact on left....block.
Defender moving left, contact on front...charge.
Defender moving forward, contact on front, block.
Defender moving back, contact on front, charge.
Defender moving left & back, contact on left, block.
Defender moving left & back, contact on front, charge.
Defender moving left, contact on right, charge.
etc.

Due to the amount of contact, there may not be a foul, but the above is what foul, if any, you should have based on the direction of movement in combination with the point of impact.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

When I see a dribbler trying to go around a guard, and that guard steps sideways into the shooter, I don't see how that is a charge.

That's what I thought I saw here before going frame by frame to see that the guard stepped sideways before contact with the dribbler/shooter occurred.

Even if the guard is still stepping sideways at the time of contact, the guard still has LGP, unless the offensive player's head and shoulders have passed the guard.

[Rich]

Even if you DON'T think he had initial LGP (he did), he gets two feet down in the path of an offensive player short of contact and establishes it.

[JRutledge]

Play #4:



Peace

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

When I see a dribbler trying to go around a guard, and that guard steps sideways into the shooter, I don't see how that is a charge.

If you can't tell the difference between a dribbler and a shooter, ....

[Kelvin green]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

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.

Sorry but I disagree. Too many times I have seen us penalize good defense. Often times we are too easy to find that the defensive player did something wrong. We should be more along the lines of innocent until proven guilty. We need to assume the defensive play is legal until the prove to us they violated the rule. In this play, the defender does a good job beating the player down the floor and getting in front of him. Look we all know where the offensive guy is going the defender got way out in front of him and took the play away. This is a PC Call any day in my book....Philosophically calling this a PC call also reduces rough play. By calling this a Block your telling the offensive players that you will allow that continued play and continue to reward the offense forcing its self in on plays...

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Kelvin green

Sorry but I disagree. Too many times I have seen us penalize good defense. Often times we are too easy to find that the defensive player did something wrong. We should be more along the lines of innocent until proven guilty. We need to assume the defensive play is legal until the prove to us they violated the rule. In this play, the defender does a good job beating the player down the floor and getting in front of him. Look we all know where the offensive guy is going the defender got way out in front of him and took the play away. This is a PC Call any day in my book....Philosophically calling this a PC call also reduces rough play. By calling this a Block your telling the offensive players that you will allow that continued play and continue to reward the offense forcing its self in on plays...

I agree.

It seems many officials are looking at the defense and looking for a reason to put a foul on the defender -- in actuality, there are times when we should say "good enough" and send it the other way.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

...
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. ...

Why should you be giving the benefit of the doubt to the offense?

[BryanV21]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Why should you be giving the benefit of the doubt to the offense?

I thought I was pretty clear that you shouldn't give the benefit of the doubt to anyone.

Sent from my SM-G925V using Tapatalk

[Rich]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

I thought I was pretty clear that you shouldn't give the benefit of the doubt to anyone.

Sent from my SM-G925V using Tapatalk

Impossible. It's called doubt for a reason.

[BigT]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Look at the defender and his feet. He is at the Restricted area circle when he jumps and appears to stay at that level when jumped into by the jumper. I think this was a good no call honestly. I thought it was a foul when I first saw it, but the replay changed my mind. But it was close for sure when live.

Peace

JRutlege IMHO he came across the paint and jumped. He didnt come across stop and jump into the air. I say his body isnt straight up knowing where he had been and where he is going when contact happens. The offensive player is knocked down. I dont see many plays where the defense jumps straight up and the offensive player goes to the ground. If they have been letting go that type of moving into a shooter than I am fine. If I see that play I would call a foul every time.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BigT

JRutlege IMHO he came across the paint and jumped. He didnt come across stop and jump into the air. I say his body isnt straight up knowing where he had been and where he is going when contact happens. The offensive player is knocked down. I dont see many plays where the defense jumps straight up and the offensive player goes to the ground. If they have been letting go that type of moving into a shooter than I am fine. If I see that play I would call a foul every time.

He came across the paint with his feet, then jumped into what appeared to be his vertical space. Now the video angle is not the best, but I see him going straight up. And yes, I see a lot of defenders doing this now, especially in college as it relates to the RA as if they jump, they can be ruled not responsible for the contact that takes place. And I also see many plays where offensive players go into bigger defenders and fall. Those are not always fouls and I am not penalizing defenders for doing good basic things. Now the official in this video pass on that play, I am assuming they felt they were legal.

And if you see that play and call a foul every time, then that is part of why coaches say, "He got hit" and expecting a call just because there was some contact. And in boys basketball, players going into the lane are going to have contact a lot no matter what. We should not penalize good defense when it takes place. Because you have already like the others penalized the defender when he or she might have done everything legal. Now if you tell me you feel this player jumped into the shooter and was outside of the vertical space he earned, that is fine. But I see no evidence of that from the angles we got of that type of movement. And the second vertical play looked very sheepish at best that was actually called. But we have a better angle on the second play.

Peace