The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #31 (permalink)  
Old Wed Apr 13, 2005, 02:13pm
Fav theme: Roundball Rock
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Near Dog River (sorta)
Posts: 8,558
Quote:
Originally posted by Back In The Saddle
Quote:
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.

Like we said: block.
__________________
Pope Francis
Reply With Quote
  #32 (permalink)  
Old Wed Apr 13, 2005, 04:45pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 9,466
Send a message via AIM to rainmaker
Quote:
Originally posted by M&M Guy
Quote:
Originally posted by Back In The Saddle
Quote:
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.

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.
If you guys are doing this, you've got way, way too much time on your hands!
Reply With Quote
  #33 (permalink)  
Old Wed Apr 13, 2005, 04:52pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Champaign, IL
Posts: 5,687
Quote:
Originally posted by rainmaker

If you guys are doing this, you've got way, way too much time on your hands!
What else would I be doing at work...
__________________
M&M's - The Official Candy of the Department of Redundancy Department.

(Used with permission.)
Reply With Quote
  #34 (permalink)  
Old Wed Apr 13, 2005, 04:56pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: In the offseason.
Posts: 12,260
Quote:
Originally posted by M&M Guy

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.
The way to get this back into the game is to review plays in slow-motion and adjust judgement for future plays the look the same.

If the defender was moving forward, there will be a slight delay betwen the feet hitting the ground and the body coming to a stop.

Quote:
Originally posted by M&M Guy

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.
The key positition is NOT the feet. Otherwise, a player could belly up, lean, extend hips, etc. Feet down is a factor in LGP but not the only factor. If the point of contact is moving towards the dribbler...block.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com
Commissioner, Portland Basketball Officials Association
Reply With Quote
  #35 (permalink)  
Old Wed Apr 13, 2005, 05:27pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Winchester, NH
Posts: 184
Quote:
Originally posted by 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?
RTR said exactly what I was going to say.

I think what we can gain from the slow motion or stop-frame analysis is to train our brains to see what differentiates between a good play and a foul on a bang-bang play. I don't know if the specifics of what Cameron observed can work in real life, but I like his suggestion that there are things to watch other then the feet that might help us make better calls. It is also interesting that even with a frame-by-frame view of the play, people are seeing and interpreting it differently.

This is one of the most interesting and entertaining threads I have seen on this board! Thanks for starting it, MiG!

[Edited by Rick Durkee on Apr 13th, 2005 at 06:30 PM]
__________________
Insert cool signature line here!
Reply With Quote
  #36 (permalink)  
Old Wed Apr 13, 2005, 05:41pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Champaign, IL
Posts: 5,687
Quote:
Originally posted by Camron Rust

The key positition is NOT the feet. Otherwise, a player could belly up, lean, extend hips, etc. Feet down is a factor in LGP but not the only factor. If the point of contact is moving towards the dribbler...block.
I thought it was a key, along with the principal of verticality. I agree with your point on leaning, extending hips, etc., because that is moving outside the defender's vertical plane. I guess what I'm saying is strictly using the phrase "torso moving towards the dribbler" is not an automatic block. Maybe this is a limited example, but what if the defender has got his feet to a spot on the floor first, (slightly ahead of his body), the offensive player tries to step over or past the feet, and the contact occurs when the defender's body gets to that area directly above his feet, still within that vertical plane. The defender's body did move into the dribbler, but isn't the dribbler responsible for the contact? I guess another extreme or limited example could be if a defender B1 is squatting down (maybe starting to get up after a hard screen), and the dribbler A1 tries to jump over the defender. If B1 stands up and contacts A1 within his vertical plane, isn't the foul on A1?

Anyway, that's why I like discussing the videos, because it's a way to actually view a situation and hear other opinions as to what should (or should not) be called.
__________________
M&M's - The Official Candy of the Department of Redundancy Department.

(Used with permission.)
Reply With Quote
  #37 (permalink)  
Old Wed Apr 13, 2005, 08:41pm
Huck Finn
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 3,347
Quote:
[i]Is this how detailed the D1 guys game tapes get broken down?[/B]
To answer your question, no! They would both be PC and we would move on. If any of these plays are close it would be the second one not the first one.
__________________
"Be more concerned with your character than your reputation, because your character is what you really are, while your reputation is merely what others think you are." -- John Wooden
Reply With Quote
  #38 (permalink)  
Old Wed Apr 13, 2005, 09:44pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 2,557
I have PC on both of them. I can see how the official called block in the first one.

Also its bad how the other two officials start to move the other way down the court, this may happen to some of us as we just don't realize we're doing it. Somthing to think about when you're out on the court.


PS Cool on the vidoes, please post more.
Reply With Quote
  #39 (permalink)  
Old Thu Apr 14, 2005, 12:52am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Canada, eh?
Posts: 1,628
Quote:
Originally posted by tomegun
If any of these plays are close it would be the second one not the first one.
Say what????

__________________
HOMER: Just gimme my gun.
CLERK: Hold on, the law requires a five-day waiting period; we've got run a background check...
HOMER: Five days???? But I'm mad NOW!!
Reply With Quote
  #40 (permalink)  
Old Thu Apr 14, 2005, 01:29am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 2,674
I have PC on both and I agree with tomegun that the second one is closer to a block.

In the second the contact is not THROUGH the torso it is glancing contact. The defender timed his landing and loaded up to go down, it was 60% PC and 40% flop, IMO.

Had the dribbler not had that last dribble get away from him slightly, he'd have avoided the defender completely.

In the first lead guessed, it was far from a great job of watching the defense. On a bang-bang play like that if you know you are selling that sucker.

The offensive player was surprised by the defender, the contact was through the torso, the defender did not belly-up, there was no exaggerated body position, and both trail and center's instinct was that it was a charge.
Reply With Quote
  #41 (permalink)  
Old Thu Apr 14, 2005, 10:32am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Just north of hell
Posts: 9,250
Send a message via AIM to Dan_ref
Quote:
Originally posted by blindzebra
I have PC on both and I agree with tomegun that the second one is closer to a block.

In the second the contact is not THROUGH the torso it is glancing contact. The defender timed his landing and loaded up to go down, it was 60% PC and 40% flop, IMO.

Had the dribbler not had that last dribble get away from him slightly, he'd have avoided the defender completely.

In the first lead guessed, it was far from a great job of watching the defense. On a bang-bang play like that if you know you are selling that sucker.

The offensive player was surprised by the defender, the contact was through the torso, the defender did not belly-up, there was no exaggerated body position, and both trail and center's instinct was that it was a charge.
Flop? What does a defender have to do for you to not think he was flopping? IMO that kid played great defense.

And where in the rules or case books can I find this "contact through the torso" thing?
Reply With Quote
  #42 (permalink)  
Old Thu Apr 14, 2005, 11:24am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: In the offseason.
Posts: 12,260
Quote:
Originally posted by M&M Guy
Quote:
Originally posted by Camron Rust

The key positition is NOT the feet. Otherwise, a player could belly up, lean, extend hips, etc. Feet down is a factor in LGP but not the only factor. If the point of contact is moving towards the dribbler...block.
I thought it was a key, along with the principal of verticality. I agree with your point on leaning, extending hips, etc., because that is moving outside the defender's vertical plane. I guess what I'm saying is strictly using the phrase "torso moving towards the dribbler" is not an automatic block. Maybe this is a limited example, but what if the defender has got his feet to a spot on the floor first, (slightly ahead of his body), the offensive player tries to step over or past the feet, and the contact occurs when the defender's body gets to that area directly above his feet, still within that vertical plane. The defender's body did move into the dribbler, but isn't the dribbler responsible for the contact? I guess another extreme or limited example could be if a defender B1 is squatting down (maybe starting to get up after a hard screen), and the dribbler A1 tries to jump over the defender. If B1 stands up and contacts A1 within his vertical plane, isn't the foul on A1?

Anyway, that's why I like discussing the videos, because it's a way to actually view a situation and hear other opinions as to what should (or should not) be called.
I think that that B1 raising up wouldn't be a block...verticality...can always raise/jump vertically. This is different than the torso moving horizontally. The only permitted horizontal directions of movement are lateral and away.

In live action, I thought this was an easy PC foul. Only after seeing others early comments did I review it in slow motion and realize it wasn't so easy.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com
Commissioner, Portland Basketball Officials Association
Reply With Quote
  #43 (permalink)  
Old Thu Apr 14, 2005, 12:23pm
Huck Finn
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 3,347
Quote:
[i]In live action, I thought this was an easy PC foul. Only after seeing others early comments did I review it in slow motion and realize it wasn't so easy. [/B]
Are you saying that you took the time to open up the file, look at the play and didn't make a solid judgement one way or the other until you read something someone else posted?

These plays are great opportunities to work on breaking down film. Looking at different players over and over is a luxury we will not have on the court but the ability to see plays like this is a valuable learning tool to use.

I still stand by what I said earlier, the second video was closer to being a block than the first one. In the second video both players changed direction and the dribbler was trying to go around the defender instead of through him. At the same time defender was trying to draw contact. When looking at the offensive player in both plays I tried to imagine what would have happened if they (the offensive player) would have done something to avoid contact. In the first play that would have been to go straight up and down. In the second play that would have been to totally alter his course with the dribble. In the first play there probably wouldn't have been enough contact to call a foul, in the second play there would have been. Also, if you do the same thing with the defenders then the first play is still similar to what happened since it is already questionable that the defender was barely moving if at all. On the secon play if the defender would have stopped to avoid contact there probably wouldn't have been any contact. I hope that wasn't jumbled up. Sometimes it is easier to say and/or think something than it is to type it.
__________________
"Be more concerned with your character than your reputation, because your character is what you really are, while your reputation is merely what others think you are." -- John Wooden
Reply With Quote
  #44 (permalink)  
Old Thu Apr 14, 2005, 12:46pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 54
After seeing each one the first time I have to say that I would call the PC on both. I replayed and replayed them and didn't change my mind. The defense has a right to LGP on both. Of course, if I saw either called the opposite way, I would say that it was a good call.
__________________
Stripes1950
Reply With Quote
  #45 (permalink)  
Old Thu Apr 14, 2005, 12:53pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 2,674
Quote:
Originally posted by Dan_ref
Quote:
Originally posted by blindzebra
I have PC on both and I agree with tomegun that the second one is closer to a block.

In the second the contact is not THROUGH the torso it is glancing contact. The defender timed his landing and loaded up to go down, it was 60% PC and 40% flop, IMO.

Had the dribbler not had that last dribble get away from him slightly, he'd have avoided the defender completely.

In the first lead guessed, it was far from a great job of watching the defense. On a bang-bang play like that if you know you are selling that sucker.

The offensive player was surprised by the defender, the contact was through the torso, the defender did not belly-up, there was no exaggerated body position, and both trail and center's instinct was that it was a charge.
Flop? What does a defender have to do for you to not think he was flopping? IMO that kid played great defense.

And where in the rules or case books can I find this "contact through the torso" thing?
The contact was not hard enough to floor the defender on that play, he sold the call which I consider a flop.

You have obviously never attended any camps or heard any big time officials talk about block/charge if you need to have contact through the torso explained to you.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:21pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1