Faking a charge

[ChuckElias]

Originally posted by Lotto
4-33.6f says explicitly that a player who has established LGP is not required to have the feet on the playing court when shifting in the path of the dribbler to maintain LGP. This could apply to a player who has fallen on the floor.

Unless you look at AR 23 on page 80 of the '04-'05 NCAA book.

[Dan beat me to it!! ]

[JugglingReferee]

Originally posted by ChuckElias
Yup, JR's right, as usual.

Big surprise there.

[Lotto]

Originally posted by Dan_ref

I'm not sure I agree, let's go through it:

I'm not sure how you can fall down within your own vertical plane.

Staying in one's vertical plane provision is only relevant to maintaining LGP when raising hands or jumping. There are lots of ways to maintain LGP while leaving one's vertical plane. Look at a, d, e, and f, for example.

Also, I agree the AR is under establishing LGP but here's what the AR says:

I read this as saying that laying on the floor is by definition an illegal defensive position period.

I read it as saying that since this player cannot establish legal guarding position while lying on the floor, he/she must be in an illegal guarding position.

However, I understand your point. Only an NCAA interpreter knows for sure...

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by Lotto

Staying in one's vertical plane provision is only relevant to maintaining LGP when raising hands or jumping. There are lots of ways to maintain LGP while leaving one's vertical plane. Look at a, d, e, and f, for example.

You're saying the defender can stick a leg out?

[that's a walk]

Partner & I both had the opportunity to call the T last year and did so. I agree with the thought that it is dangerous when the defensive player goes down under the basket but, IMO, he/she better have a reason to go down. If he flops he gonna get a 'T'. I see no reason to call a block if one was not present. Next time he/she might think about playing defense instead of deceiving the ref. I have no problem making this call.

[Lotto]

Originally posted by Dan_ref
You're saying the defender can stick a leg out?

No.

[Ref in PA]

A player, offensive or defensive has a right to a spot on the floor. If the B1 falls to the floor and A1 still chooses to dribble over the top of B1, who has initiated the contact? Who is responsible for the contact? LGP has nothing to do with the foul in this case.

Another example: B1 is stationary guarding A1, with his back to A2. A2 dribbling runs over B1, knocking B1 to the floor. B1 never had LGP, but A2 still charged into him. B1 is entitled to his spot on the floor.

If B1 has fallen to the floor for whatever reason, he is still entitled to his spot. The defender's movement is now somewhat restricted and defensive moves that make contact with the offensive player could be fouls of some sort. You would have to see the play.

Just because a defender has fallen to the floor does not give anyone the right to run him over and have the foul on the player on the floor. The player on the floor still has to commit a foul (ie. do something to cause a foul) to be called for a foul.

[ChuckElias]

You are completely correct in FED games. In NCAA games, if A1 trips over B1 who has fallen to the floor -- tough luck -- foul on B1.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by Ref in PA
A player, offensive or defensive has a right to a spot on the floor. If the B1 falls to the floor and A1 still chooses to dribble over the top of B1, who has initiated the contact? Who is responsible for the contact? LGP has nothing to do with the foul in this case.

Another example: B1 is stationary guarding A1, with his back to A2. A2 dribbling runs over B1, knocking B1 to the floor. B1 never had LGP, but A2 still charged into him. B1 is entitled to his spot on the floor.

If B1 has fallen to the floor for whatever reason, he is still entitled to his spot. The defender's movement is now somewhat restricted and defensive moves that make contact with the offensive player could be fouls of some sort. You would have to see the play.

Just because a defender has fallen to the floor does not give anyone the right to run him over and have the foul on the player on the floor. The player on the floor still has to commit a foul (ie. do something to cause a foul) to be called for a foul.

Good summary of the way the play should be called in FED.

FED casebook play 10.6.1SitE is the rules reference.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by ChuckElias
You are completely correct in FED games. In NCAA games, if A1 trips over B1 who has fallen to the floor -- tough luck -- foul on B1.

Yup, that's NCAA 4-33-4(a)-AR23.

But....that play describes a pivot player with the ball turning and then falling over a defender who has fallen to the floor. What about a play where a defender has fallen, and the dribbler facing that way has plenty of time/distance to alter their path to avoid that defender? I just can't believe that the purpose and intent of the NCAA ruling is to give the dribbler carte blanche to run into or over defenders- no matter where they are, if the defender has fallen down. Don't you think that the concept of each player having the right to take a position on the floor shouldn't be taken into consideration in this case ? Iow, how many steps should you allow that dribbler to take before running over the falling defender, if any?

[ChuckElias]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee
I just can't believe that the purpose and intent of the NCAA ruling is to give the dribbler carte blanche to run into or over defenders- no matter where they are, if the defender has fallen down. Iow, how many steps should you allow that dribbler to take before running over the falling defender, if any?

I'm having a hard time imagining what the dribbler could do to foul the guy on the floor. He might step on him, in which case I'd have to judge whether it was intentional or not. But other than that, what action(s) are you envisioning? If the defender falls down, the dribbler is going to the basket. And in that case, if he trips over B1, it's a foul on B1.

What other case could arise?

[Lotto]

Originally posted by ChuckElias

I'm having a hard time imagining what the dribbler could do to foul the guy on the floor. He might step on him, in which case I'd have to judge whether it was intentional or not. But other than that, what action(s) are you envisioning? If the defender falls down, the dribbler is going to the basket. And in that case, if he trips over B1, it's a foul on B1.

What other case could arise?

B1 is guarding A1, who is dribbling. B1 has established LGP. A1 moves agressively straight at B1, who moves straight back. B1 loses his/her balance and falls backwards, at which point A1 runs into and trips over B1.

Clearly if B1 had not fallen over backwards, this would have been a foul on A1. The question is whether B1 loses LGP by falling over backwards. Some in this thread have argued that A.R. 23 after 4-33.4a says that any time a player is on the floor, he/she is in an illegal defensive position. However, looking at 4-33.6, one could argue that B1 has met the requirements to maintain LGP.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by ChuckElias
[/B]

If the defender falls down, the dribbler is going to the basket. And in that case, if he trips over B1, it's a foul on B1.

[/B][/QUOTE]If B1 is already on the floor 3/4 steps away from the dribbler with the dribbler facing him, and the dribbler just keeps on a-motoring and subsequently falls over B1, then it's still B1's foul? Time/distance never has any bearing on this call? Do you think that is the pupose/intent of that NCAA AR?

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by ChuckElias

I'm having a hard time imagining what the dribbler could do to foul the guy on the floor. He might step on him, in which case I'd have to judge whether it was intentional or not. But other than that, what action(s) are you envisioning? If the defender falls down, the dribbler is going to the basket. And in that case, if he trips over B1, it's a foul on B1.

What other case could arise?

It's hard for me to imagine what possible advantage a dribbler would have in knowingly going directly towards a player on the floor. If there's contact then virtually always the dribbler didn't have time to avoid the defender on the floor.

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

If the defender falls down, the dribbler is going to the basket. And in that case, if he trips over B1, it's a foul on B1.

[/B]

If B1 is already on the floor 3/4 steps away from the dribbler with the dribbler facing him, and the dribbler just keeps on a-motoring and subsequently falls over B1, then it's still B1's foul? Time/distance never has any bearing on this call? Do you think that is the pupose/intent of that NCAA AR? [/B][/QUOTE]

hmmmm...getting into uncharted waters here but I believe you need to give the dribbler the benefit of the doubt on your play and make your call/no call assuming the dribbler didn't see the defender on the floor.

Again, if the defender's on the floor what does the dribbler gain by tripping over him?