I think there are two possible reasons that they didn't consider (or at least go with) and FF1....

1. The player reached out with his arm as he ran by, not a grab from behind.
2. The other player really didn't have an obvious advantage...he was chasing a ball that was going quite likely going OOB.

Of course, my point #2 is in contradiction with the fact that they deemed the Villanova player to have obtained control.

And I agree this crew have a rough game. I think there were several misses. However, the biggest ones I can think of favored Villanova. So, that certainly didn't cost them the game.

One and only one warning -- and the person receiving it knows who he is.

Next time, you can sit out the rest of the tourney again. Let it go.

Coverage on the missed BI play....Is the The Trail's call who was table side or the Center who was opposite table? Would this miss likely end this crew's run?

JRut, didn't want to start a new thread without your blessing, so here's a video request from March 19:
Michigan-Louisville, second half, 5:30 left. Louisville player blows a dunk but remains hanging on the rim in order to help corral the rebound.

Officials ruled BI, but nothing more. In HS, you could argue this was 10-4-4a (placing a hand on the ring to gain an advantage). Is the rule different in NCAAM, or were the officials likely going with the least disruptive call in a tight game?

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/fxRf-qsfnsQ" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Peace

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/WFDQylDUFuY" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Peace

They pointed at the floor as if it was an RA block but he obtained LGP outside of the circle then stepped back into it. If it is a block, it can't be due to the RA. I have charge.

I know we had this conversation before but this would be a secondary defender as this is an outnumbered break. Some might disagree, but this is why it was called a block IMO.

Peace

Isn't that irrelevant when a defender gains LGP outside of the RA since the RA is about obtaining LGP?

You cannot be there at the time of contact. So even if you back up into the RA, you are a secondary defender, you have committed a blocking foul.

Peace

That is not what the rule says.....it only says that all defenders are a secondary defender on and outnumbering fast-break. It doesn't say they lose previously gained LGP by backing into the arc.

Then the RA rule says:

NCAA Case Book:

This case says that if the defender gets initial LGP outside the area, it can still be a charge. It doesn't restrict the defender's movement after gaining LGP.

Agree with Rust on the rule. Disagree about where he established LGP. I think his right foot is on the line when he established.

Not saying you are wrong however....

When the ball handler crosses the 3-pt line (pause vid at :08), do you feel that the defender is in LGP? At the same time, do you feel that the defender is still a secondary defender?

IMO, the defender established LGP well before the contact and at contact was considered to be a primary defender. (for outnumbering fast-breaks, defensive players are secondary defenders initially). I know why they called this a block however I feel it should have been PC.

I do not disagree that the language is fuzzy, but that is not how the rule is applied. When the player is in the RA during contact, that is what they seem to want to be called a block. Many examples have been shown on video to support that position. Because I have seen secondary defenders back up into the RA and get called and have seen video that supports this.

Peace

I actually include this in my college pre-games. Once establishing LGP, the secondary defender can retreat into the RA and absorb contact.