I'm certain he didn't see him when contact was made...but had he turned his head he would have. This is a side screen not behind. Frankly, I could have lived with a block simply because the screener was barely touched and went down causing defender go down with him. But...this is one of the oldest plays in the game. defender has to be aware...

Unless he is totally behind him, he is considered in within the visual field.

I agree. No time/distance was given. At the time the screen was set, the defender was moving and didn't take even one step before contact occurred. Screen was late and was, as a result, illegal. The instinct on the signal was correct.

Frankly, this is where I was on this play until I saw an end line view of it.

Then when I saw the end line view I saw the Wisconsin player crumble to the ground with virtually no contact and the WKU player trip over him.

1. Why is the center calling this? He has an offensive player on the block in his primary surrounded by two defenders, and also has another offensive player in his primary that could take a quick pass and shot. The center should be ready to pick up the secondary defender around the RA should the dribbler had gotten around his primary defender.

2. The lead also had a whistle on this play, and should have been given first crack at this play. To be fair, in the heat of the moment, you sometimes don't hear that second whistle, though. Heck, it's not like the lead didn't have a good look at the play, either.

3. I honestly can't tell if it's a block or a charge. At first I thought the defender moved into the dribbler as the dribbler was trying to drive around him, thus a "block" call. But then I thought the defender beat the dribbler to the spot of contact, after having gained LGP, thus a "charge" call. I'm leaning "charge", but not 100%.

I have one thanks, just not in my work desk

That play opened up to the C in exactly the area the C normally looks through (across the FT line area, even if it extends beyond his line on the floor a little).

The elbow push off that was called by the C likely would not have been visible to the lead. If the C lays off that, there is a non-insignificant chance the L makes the wrong call (correct from what he could have seen, however). When you have something like that, it is best to take the call rather than risk a partner, who couldn't see what you saw, has something else.

I can see what you're saying. Just seems odd the C was looking there.

This is also not a secondary defender play. This is a primary defender moving to the lane to stop the ball handler that is coming to him. I think it is a very good call and made by the right official. And it appears that the lead had the same thing if you just read how he was coming off the lane.

Peace

They teach the lead to make that call. If the play opens up to the C, they want them to get calls they see. The other players were doing nothing but standing. Because one of those players might have come over and he would have been able to know where the ball came from.

Peace

The link lets you d/l it -- so, yes, you have one in your work desk.

The guy on or near the RA could be a secondary defender is what I'm saying. Wouldn't he be the C's responsibility?

Imagining myself as the C in that play I figure to be looking at the matchup near the block first, as it's entirely possible for a shot to go up and those two jostling for rebounding position. At the same time keeping an eye on what the dribbler is doing. I wouldn't have been surprised at all if the dribbler decided to pass to his teammate who would be in front of me for a quick shot attempt.

I don't have strong feelings against the C taking this call, but this isn't a case where absolutely nothing his happening in his area and therefore it makes more sense for him to be looking across his primary to the other side.

And being clearly in the lead's area I'm giving him first crack at this call, instead of immediately making a call without any thought given to my partner (which is why I don't think he even knew the lead blew his whistle). And if the lead was straightlined then why did he blow his whistle in the first place?

NFHS language not NCAA
 

The severe language is in the NHFS book, the NCAA language only refers to inadvertent contact, which shall be incidental. IMO the defenders visual field is directly ahead at the thrower-in. He did not see the defender, his contact was inadvertent, therefore incidental - no call.

The NCAA book does not define visual field - but refers to it as blind. If the player didn't see it cause his eyes were fixed on the thrower, it was blind to him.

If this screen happened on the playing court, what happened? The screener set a screen which separated his defender from his teammate. The screen was successful and the screened defender did not do anything wrong. Play on.

Lastly, we usually call the foul on the defender being screened when we can determine that he peaked at the screen and decided to plow through it anyway. I don't see that as the case in this play.

Anytime a coach sets up a play to trick the officials, there should be skepticism

His only responsibility? No.

OK, but not seeing your point here. The matchups on the C's side were just standing. They were not moving or cutting to the basket.

Well, absolutely nothing was happening in his area. Players were just standing and watching. You do not need to be hawking players just standing. When I say competitive match-up, usually that means they are trying to set screens, cut or working around in the post for the ball. Players that stand do not need any extra attention.

Well, this is not a play where they have the same angle. So the "first crack" to me suggests they see the same thing. They are not looking at the same thing, the C has an open look on the play and makes a call based on that open look. If I was the L, I would be fine with his whistle and call. We are a team, not individuals working the game.

Peace