My toughest Blcok/Charge

[Richard Ogg]

Here is the most difficult block/charge call for me. Obviously, I'd like opinions....

Following a steal above the 3-point line, we are on a fast break down the court. B1 is fast and smart. B1 is not able to get in front of A1 to set up for a charge, but does get near the basket first. B1 establishes position, stationary, hands up, with the hoop off their shoulder. (B1 is sideways.)

A1, a step behind, jumps for the shot. A1 makes a "glancing" (not straight-on) contact with B1's shoulder, then goes to the floor. (Maybe both fall down.)

The problem? B1 established position, was vertical, did not move, did not lean, did not extend knee, did not do anything wrong. A1 got past the shoulder, or at least did not hit B1 squarly in the torso. I could live with a "no call", but locally we are now told to find a foul when a crash sends players to the floor. I find it hard to sell a PC with only glancing contact (even though I think the rule book supports that). I've had evaluators state "B1 didn't take it in the chest, so no PC." I hate to penalize the defense for a perfect legal play.

Thanks.......

[mick]

Originally posted by Richard Ogg

I could live with a "no call", but locally we are now told to find a foul when a crash sends players to the floor......

Richard,
I have no call.
Your local advisory should retool their thinking.
Did they throw out any other rules?
If the Coaches know what you've been told to do, they are going to train their teams, and you'll see more and more and....
mick

[co2ice]

Richard: I'd say a no call also, I'm one who hates to punish great defense but if the defender didn't square up and take the charge head on I'm less likley to reward him. Your advisors do indeed need to reconsider this rule it may lead to even more "academy" performances.

[JRutledge]

I agree with the no call, but a player does not need to take contact straight on to get a PC foul. They made a revision in the rules this year about that.

Originally posted by co2ice
Richard: I'd say a no call also, I'm one who hates to punish great defense but if the defender didn't square up and take the charge head on I'm less likley to reward him. Your advisors do indeed need to reconsider this rule it may lead to even more "academy" performances.

[BktBallRef]

Rut is correct. A defender no longer needs to take the contact in the torso. Once he establishes position, it doesn't matter if he turns sideways and takes the contact. In fact, I had one tonight.

However, on the play that you describe, I have a no call. I've seen the smae play 10 times this year and haven't called it yet. Now if the defender is legitimately knocked to the floor, there was probably contact with more than just the shoulder. Then you have a PC because the defender has been placed at a disadvantage for a possible rebound.

[Dan_ref]

I agree with the others. If it was more than "glancing
contact" then we have a PC. I got nothing as you described it. Bad policy to state "you gotta have *something*
on a crash"! In fact it takes a good ref to find nothing
on a legitimate crash.

[rainmaker]

Originally posted by BktBallRef
because the defender has been placed at a disadvantage for a possible rebound.

Not to mention the disadvantage of not stopping the ball!!