Block/Charge

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

The point that I am trying to make is that while the rules talk about the dribbler (A1) getting his/her head and shoulders past the defender (B1) still does not mean that any and all contact should be charged against B1. If B1 moves into A1 after A1 gets his/her head and shoulders past B1 then B1 should be charged with a blocking foul; if B1 moves straight back or away from A1 and contact still occurs, then it is possible that A1 could be charged with the contact or no foul should be charged to either A1 or B1.

If B1 does what I have described in my post of Jan. 28, 2004, 07:55pm, it would be very difficult to charge B1 with a foul. One of the fundamentals of basketball is that if B1 has obtained/estalished a legal guarding position, is not moving, and is maintaing his/her verticality, then B1 cannot be guilty of a foul if there is contact between B1 and a moving A1.

[Jurassic Referee]

Mark, your points above are well-taken. I also agree with them.

My point was that you did not have the information contained in your summary above to make your original definitive response to DJ's initial post. The defender's verticality was the key information that was missing.

[JugglingReferee]

Originally posted by TriggerMN
I'm guessing that MTDSr. had a similar play on December 17, 1954, and that's how he's basing his explanation. Of course, the ball was tossed into the peach basket, and he had to go grab the broomstick to pop it back out, but that's another story.

Just kidding. Carry on all.

Dec 17 was a Sunday in 1954. They didn't play on Sundays back then.

[DJ]

During the plays that I talked about in my original post, B1 had established a stationary legal guarding position just below the free throw line when A1 dribbled up to B1 made initial contact but not enough to warrant a foul and then tried to duck under B1and got his head and shoulders past the defender and then caused B1 to fall to the floor. The officials called this a block twice during the same game and like I said the only good thing about this call in my opinion is they were consistant. Not right but consistant! To me this is a player control foul because even though A1 got his head and shoulders past B1, A1 caused the contact and put B1 at a disadvantage when B1 had established that spot in a legal way. The reason that I posted this play because I think that it is another case of some officials giving the benefit of the doubt to the person with the ball. It is a common mistake that some officials make and we do not reward good defensive play. I am as guilty as anyone but have become less guilty as I have matured as an official.

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by DJ
During the plays that I talked about in my original post, B1 had established a stationary legal guarding position just below the free throw line when A1 dribbled up to B1 made initial contact but not enough to warrant a foul and then tried to duck under B1and got his head and shoulders past the defender and then caused B1 to fall to the floor.

What do you mean "duck under"?

If he "ducked under" B1 doesn't that say something about B1's lack of verticality?

[DJ]

He tried to side step/duck under the defender who had stopped his progress to the basket. Sorry that's the best that I can do without a video!!

[Lotto]

Consider the following two situations:

1) Dribbler A1 contacts guard B1, with contact on B1's torso.
2) Dribbler A1 gets head and shoulders past guard B1, then contact occurs.

In both situations, if B1 has not established LGP, we have a block on B1. In both situations, if B1 does not maintain verticality, which causes the contact, we have a block (or hold or some other foul) on B1.

OK, now what if B1 establishes LGP and maintains verticality? Do we have a charge in both situations? If so, what's the point of the "greater responsibility" statement that applies to situation 2 but not situation 1?

I guess my question is, what actions by B1 will lead to a different call (or no call) in these two situations?

[bob jenkins]

Originally posted by Lotto
Consider the following two situations:

1) Dribbler A1 contacts guard B1, with contact on B1's torso.
2) Dribbler A1 gets head and shoulders past guard B1, then contact occurs.

In both situations, if B1 has not established LGP, we have a block on B1. In both situations, if B1 does not maintain verticality, which causes the contact, we have a block (or hold or some other foul) on B1.

OK, now what if B1 establishes LGP and maintains verticality? Do we have a charge in both situations? If so, what's the point of the "greater responsibility" statement that applies to situation 2 but not situation 1?

I guess my question is, what actions by B1 will lead to a different call (or no call) in these two situations?

(In both plays, assume LGP to start)

1) A1 tries to go around B1. B1 moves to maintain position, and is still movign when contact is made on the torso. Charge.

2) A1 tries to go around B1. B1 moves to maintain position, but A1 gets head and shoulders past B1. B1 is still moving when contact is made. Block.