![]() |
|
|
|||
Quote:
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com Commissioner, Portland Basketball Officials Association |
|
|||
Quote:
My guess is the committee is trying to keep defenders from taking the "easy" way out by just standing in a spot that just takes away layups, rather than playing defense. Sure, it's a fine line between the two. But, remember, that's why they made the distinction between someone standing in that spot on "north-south" drives vs. "east-west" drives along the baseline.
__________________
M&M's - The Official Candy of the Department of Redundancy Department. (Used with permission.) |
|
|||
Quote:
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com Commissioner, Portland Basketball Officials Association |
|
|||
Quote:
And MTD, Sr. - what in the hell difference does it make that Barb Jacobs never refereed??? She was just a coach??? So only referees should have any input on the rules? Someone who has devoted their life to knowing and understanding the game has no business giving input on rules? That's a ridiculous position to take. |
|
|||
Quote:
Peace
__________________
Let us get into "Good Trouble." ----------------------------------------------------------- Charles Michael “Mick” Chambers (1947-2010) |
|
|||
Quote:
The final choice is made by the offense when they see the defender in their path. The offense is the one causing the collision by not altering course once their path has been occupied. The fact that it occurs under the basket should not be any different than doing so at the FT line. Why not extend the range to which it applies to cover the entire FT lane? If a player makes a running jumpshot from outside the lane and crashes into a defender in the lane after releasing the ball, how is that any different? The defender sees that the opponent was going to shoot a jumper and just waited for him to crash into him. Why is that different? If my schedule were to such that I could work college games (and get picked up by a college assignor), I'd call it as specified. I need not agree with a rule philosopically in order to enforce it as defined.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com Commissioner, Portland Basketball Officials Association |
|
|||
Quote:
![]() I don't entirely disagree with you. But, I think I kinda get what they're after with this rule. First of all, it's not called that often that I'm aware; in fact, I only remember it coming into play 2 or 3 times in the last couple of seasons. But I'm not going out too far on the limb to say they want basketball to stay in it's purest form, and there are other examples over time how this has come into play with rule changes. That's why I mentioned goaltending - as players got taller, the rulesmakers decided that's not how they envisioned the game. So they enacted a rule that kept players from just taking the easy way out while the only thing they're doing is standing there swatting away balls as they came towards the basket. I believe this was their thinking, as well as the added safety factor, on a player just setting up underneath the basket. They felt the player is not playing "legitimate" defense by just taking that spot on the floor and waiting for the offensive player to crash into them after the shot without any other possible legitimate defensive moves, such as attempting to block the shot, preventing a pass, etc. Those defensive moves, as well as taking the charge, could be done at any other spot on the floor, and even on this same spot if the drive comes along the baseline. But, if all they do is get to that spot and wait while there's a drive for a layup, the only thing they can do is accept contact. Do you see the difference? Now, I can't resist this shot at MTD: Mark, are you saying Barb can never be a good rules interpreter because she was never an official? So, a person can never be good at a job if they've never done it before? That's not very liberal-minded of you... ![]()
__________________
M&M's - The Official Candy of the Department of Redundancy Department. (Used with permission.) |
|
|||
Quote:
![]() |
|
|||
Quote:
![]() I would've gotten my post in quicker, except I was working on my health. ![]()
__________________
M&M's - The Official Candy of the Department of Redundancy Department. (Used with permission.) |
|
|||
Quote:
|
|
|||
Quote:
__________________
Pope Francis |
|
|||
Quote:
I agree with you 100%. Personally, I hope that the NFHS never changes its rule. |
![]() |
Bookmarks |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Block or Charge? | tomegun | Basketball | 37 | Wed May 04, 2005 06:54pm |
Charge/Block? | Stripes1950 | Basketball | 13 | Mon Mar 14, 2005 03:16pm |
CHARGE OR BLOCK 2nd | RUBIERA | Basketball | 2 | Tue Feb 22, 2005 12:00pm |
Block/Charge | DJ | Basketball | 22 | Thu Jan 29, 2004 01:36pm |
block/charge | wolfe44 | Basketball | 11 | Thu Dec 12, 2002 09:29am |