My individual plays - (Video)
 

Play #1
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/xkWplHHBpHo" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Play #2

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/rh8KMhdcfxk" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Peace

Vid 1) Secondary defender. C or T can help.

Vid 2) This is basically a 50/50 call. Half would call it and the other half would not. For me, I would not as the dribbler made no attacking move and did not lose anything from the contact. Had he lost the ball or something funky then I would call it. Dribbler created all the contact and defender certainly did not mean to bump him. My 2 cents.

1) PC. There was no primary as the defender in the block charge was the first to engage the offensive player as soon as he had the ball, therefore he's the primary.
2) I personally wouldn't have a whistle as there was no advantage and the defender didn't push. The offensive player initiated the contact and defender did his best to avoid it, along with no impact on the play.

Video 1: Secondary defender, T could help but I see help more likely coming from the C.

Video 2: I do not have a foul but the ball handler puts the referee in a difficult decision making situation. I don't have the ncaa rule reference but I believe there is similar wording that the offensive player is responsible for the contact, time and distance play a factor:

NFHS 2016-17 casebook pg 90, 10.7.7 comment:

Screening principles apply to the dribbler who attempts to cut off an opponent who is approaching in a different path from the rear. In this case the dribbler must allow such opponent a maximum of two steps or an opportunity to stop or avoid contact

1. Yes, secondary defender. Not likely the T would be able to see the heel on the RA (wrong angle), but the C should be able to see it and help.

2. I would not call a foul on the defender. The dribbler tried to cut off the defender more in a screening action (yes a dribbler can also be a screener) than anything else. It "could" be called as an illegal screen (no time/distance). I'm passing on this contact. If the dribbler had been going in a straight line and/or not looked back to see the defender coming and then it happened, I might call a defensive foul, but even so, the contact was marginal. Given that the dribble chose to cause that contact, I'm going to rule that it didn't hinder the dribbler from making normal offensive movements....he did that to himself.

Section 35. Secondary Defender
Art. 1. A secondary defender is a teammate who has helped a primary defender
after that player has been beaten by an opponent because he failed to establish
or maintain a guarding position. A defensive player is beaten when the offensive
player’s head and shoulders get past the defender.

I would argue that the defender was not secondary as the ball handler drew 2 defenders with him leaving no one as a "primary" on the player that received the ball.

The primary defender was beat because of the screen catching the defenders as it was designed to do. The two defenders didn't choose to double there. This defender was not defending this play initially and moved over to help. I don't think there is much argument for him being a primary defender.

That said, I think this would be a horrible place for the RA to make the call a block...the offense was still on the floor. It was designed to prevent defenders from sliding under players committed to jumping for a shot at the rim...this wasn't one of those plays.

1. Secondary defender.

2. Foul on the defense.

I don't know NCAA well but does LDB apply in play 1?

I'm no-calling play 2 all day long.

No such thing in Men's basketball. The RA stands alone with players in the area cannot be a secondary defender, grounded.

Peace

Play #3:
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/gYFiconh5-c" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Play #4:
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/EtuIkCbnvqo" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Peace

#3 & 4...both good calls. The hand-check clearly displaced the dribbler. While I've seen some pass on that, it does have an impact. The post-armbar was more than just an armbar to maintain position. The defender was anchoring himself down and leaning into the post player with the arm. That is too much.

Play 4 was not a foul. Defender did not extend the armbar, nor did he dislodge the offensive player. Therefore, not a foul under those criteria. I would argue that the offensive player was within the post area, defined as the three-second lane and approximately three feet outside the lane, and thus not a foul on that criteria either.


Play 3 correct call. Although not a big fan of having whistles on plays going away from calling official. C should have moved to get a better look instead of leaning to see the play. Would have been a better whistle coming from C.

I get all of that, but he clearly was outside the post area if you see . He was about 2 or 3 feet outside of the post area tick (located on the end line) and I even tried to talk him out of his hands being on the ball handler. We were told to call this pretty strictly and I even gave the player a chance but he never listened (I usually say "hands, space" or something like that) if they are technically illegal.

Rarely do I ever have these situations. Usually they are clearly in the area and they are legal. That is why I pointed to there area and even said at the foul, "Way outside of the post area" to sell the reason why I called the foul. Otherwise this is not a foul in the post area. But it is anywhere else on the floor.

I just stayed with the play here. I do not think the issue was what the C was doing. I am not a fan of calling things going away from me anymore, but in this case the player entirely started with me and was easy to see. But I would prefer to stay away from most of these kinds of plays and have done a much better job this year.

Peace

Plays 5, 6, 7 (cont.)
 

Play #5
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/vWXTnyYC_D0" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Play #6
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/dHYtSM-cPE4" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Play #7
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/t9HvKXriqy0" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Peace