Block, charge or blarge ?

[tomegun]

Two plays that could probably be called either way.

In the first play the defender is NOT moving forward and moves into position with his hands up to play defense. The offensive player slightly dips his shoulder which is something I'm not so sure he would have done with a clear path to the basket. PLUS, the kid takes the contact in the torso. Close but with the benefit of replay I think it's a PC foul.
In the second play both the offensive and defensive players change direction. The defensive player is still moving slightly and has his hands in front of himself to brace for the contact. The offensive player is trying to go to the left and the movement with his right arm indicates to me that he really wanted to go around the defensive player instead of through him. After looking at the video a whistle is needed either way. This play is closer to me.

Using the videos we can sort of see what the the defensive players intended to do. While the feet don't have to be set, the feet along with the rest of the body can give away some things. I don't think I would have my hands straight up with a big man coming at me with a slightly lowered shoulder if my intent was to draw a charge. However, I always see players playing D with their hands straight up in the air. Plus, I think his feet were set. In the second play I think the player is trying to draw a charge. Was the dribbler attempting to take a path to avoid the contact and was the defender attempting to take a path to create contact. I think so.

[FrankHtown]

THIS is what this forum should be about. I love this kind of training. It makes it so much easier to visualize situations on the court. If some one could put a collection of travelling (or not) scenes together, that would be fantastic. (e.g. Villanova in the NCAA tournament). It would be much easier to identify what is travelling and what isn't, at game speeds.

[tomegun]

Brad, is there a way to have a video section on the forum? I could get a lot of clips.

[ChrisSportsFan]

This is great to review and discuss since on the court we only have 1 look. When the O player in Vid 1 dropped his shoulder and contacted, I'd call PC. In Vid 2, I'd say the D beat him to the spot and call PC. Both are bang/bang.

[M&M Guy]

I also like the idea of discussions over video clips. Sometimes it's hard to imagine a specific play being described by someone else, or it's hard to put a play into words without bringing some of your own "bias" into it. Video just doesn't lie.

In these two clips, the first time I watched them at normal speed, my initial reaction was PC on both. I was a little unsure on the first the more I watched it, but the second one continued to seem obvious to me. That's the benefit of replay vs. real-time. I think it's great to be able to have a discussion like this to see what other people think is the correct call, so I can either adjust or validate my way of viewing a play. For example, if I view a play as a charge, but 9 out of 10 others call it a block, and give the reasons why, then I need to adjust what I'm looking at. It's hard to do that with just a written description of the play.

I know videos eat up a lot of space, and some people might not be able to access them due to dial-up speeds, etc., but I think viewing and discussing video plays could be a great help to this discussion forum. Either they could be included on this site, or members could make sure we know how to get to videos stored on other sites (like the above).

[Camron Rust]

Originally posted by tomegun
Two plays that could probably be called either way.

In the first play the defender is NOT moving forward and moves into position with his hands up to play defense. The offensive player slightly dips his shoulder which is something I'm not so sure he would have done with a clear path to the basket. PLUS, the kid takes the contact in the torso. Close but with the benefit of replay I think it's a PC foul.

At first I thought it was a PC foul....until I played it back in very slow motion. The defender's torso was then clearly moving forward at the time of contact.

Dipping of the shoulder is only a clue...not a foul by itself. It only matters if (among other things) the defender has LGP.

Originally posted by tomegun

In the second play both the offensive and defensive players change direction. The defensive player is still moving slightly and has his hands in front of himself to brace for the contact. The offensive player is trying to go to the left and the movement with his right arm indicates to me that he really wanted to go around the defensive player instead of through him. After looking at the video a whistle is needed either way. This play is closer to me.

I didn't think this one was close at all. Defender was clearly moveing obliquely away (to the side and backing up) from the dribbler. He had both feet down before the step to the right where contact occurred. Direct torso contact.

[ReadyToRef]

Boy, you guys and gals are good!
On the first video I had a charge initially and after reviewing.

On the second video, I had a block initially and only after review could I see the defender establish his feet right before contact.

Great videos.

Where did you find them?

[canuckrefguy]

2nd video....dribbler clearly was out of control, defender saw this and took advantage of it. He had LGP, I'd say, almost 3/4 second before contact. Easy call.

[tomegun]

Originally posted by canuckrefguy
2nd video....dribbler clearly was out of control, defender saw this and took advantage of it. He had LGP, I'd say, almost 3/4 second before contact. Easy call.

Are we watching the same play? Even though I can live with a PC on this one the dribbler was not out of control. He changed direction and the defender changed direction.

[tomegun]

Camron, I don't see the defender's torso moving forward in the first video.

It is really splitting hairs on both of these plays but I think I would have had PC on both.

[JugglingReferee]

Video #2 - this is a PC foul. I see no evidence that the dribbler is out of control.

[Back In The Saddle]

Originally posted by tomegun
Camron, I don't see the defender's torso moving forward in the first video.

It is really splitting hairs on both of these plays but I think I would have had PC on both.

Cameron is seeing the same thing I'm seeing. You're right, it's close.

But try this: Expand the video to 2x or bigger. Play the video until just before the defender gets his feet on the ground. Pause it. Put a piece of paper or some other marker on the screen to mark the position of the back of the defender. Hold the marker there and step the video forward frame by frame. You'll see that with each frame, his torso is still moving forward. It's still moving forward when the contact occurs.

If you look closely at how the defender sets his feet, so far ahead of the rest of his body, simple physics/physiology says that either he has to be moving forward, or he'll fall on his can.

[ChrisSportsFan]

Originally posted by Back In The Saddle

Cameron is seeing the same thing I'm seeing. You're right, it's close.

But try this: Expand the video to 2x or bigger. Play the video until just before the defender gets his feet on the ground. Pause it. Put a piece of paper or some other marker on the screen to mark the position of the back of the defender. Hold the marker there and step the video forward frame by frame. You'll see that with each frame, his torso is still moving forward. It's still moving forward when the contact occurs.

If you look closely at how the defender sets his feet, so far ahead of the rest of his body, simple physics/physiology says that either he has to be moving forward, or he'll fall on his can.

Wow, this is getting right down to the nitty-gritty. Is this how detailed the D1 guys game tapes get broken down? I'm not stating whether it's good or bad, I'm just impressed with BITS attention to detail.

[Dan_ref]

IMO PC for both.

[M&M Guy]

Originally posted by Back In The Saddle

Cameron is seeing the same thing I'm seeing. You're right, it's close.

But try this: Expand the video to 2x or bigger. Play the video until just before the defender gets his feet on the ground. Pause it. Put a piece of paper or some other marker on the screen to mark the position of the back of the defender. Hold the marker there and step the video forward frame by frame. You'll see that with each frame, his torso is still moving forward. It's still moving forward when the contact occurs.

If you look closely at how the defender sets his feet, so far ahead of the rest of his body, simple physics/physiology says that either he has to be moving forward, or he'll fall on his can.

This is a great breakdown, but the part that worries me is how do we translate this to real-time? When we see the play for the first time (and only time), and react based on the info and angle that we have, we make the decision. We don't have the luxury of being able to pull out a piece of paper and watch the players do it again. ("Oh, wait, #23 can you do that move one more time, but do it slower for me?") I try to react on visual "clues", such as the position of the defender's feet, was the contact in the torso, etc.

As for the feet being ahead of the torso, and the torso of the defender moving forward at the time of contact - isn't the key the position of the feet? If the feet got to the spot on the floor, and contact was made in that "cone of verticality" (oh, oh..) above the feet, I don't think it matters if the body is moving forward and "catching up" to the feet.