Player control/Blocking foul?

[Sirrefalot]

Is that B2 was initially in a legal guarding position. He is entitled to a spot on the floor. He does not need to be facing his opponent. The contact was initiated by the offensive player. I would have a player control foul.

[ChuckElias]

When B2 had two feet on the floor and was facing A1, he established a legal guarding position. To maintain that position, B2 does not need to remain facing A1. He does not have to be stationary. He does not have to remain on the floor. Once B2 establishes that LGP, any contact on the torso is a foul on A1 unless B2 is moving toward A1 at the time of the contact.

[BktBallRef]

Foul on A1. You can't run over an opponent just because he has his back to you.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Sirrefalot

Is that B2 was initially in a legal guarding position. He is entitled to a spot on the floor. He does not need to be facing his opponent. The contact was initiated by the offensive player. I would have a player control foul.

Even if B2 NEVER had legal guarding position, it would still be a player control foul.

B2 was stationary and is entitled to that spot. LGP essentially allows the defender to be in motion (laterally or obliquely away) at the time of contact. B2 wasn't in motion and hadn't been in motion and, thus, didn't need LGP.

[zebraman]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

B2 wasn't in motion and hadn't been in motion and, thus, didn't need LGP.

Exactly. LGP just gives the defender some additional rights. Those additional rights aren't needed here because B2 has a right to maintain his spot.

[rainmaker]

Originally Posted by zebraman

Exactly. LGP just gives the defender some additional rights. Those additional rights aren't needed here because B2 has a right to maintain his spot.

You could say that B2 wasn't guarding so LGP doesn't apply. Every player has a right to his or her spot on the floor and the air above it, all the way to the ceiling. PC foul.

[RonRef]

I think if most of us see this play live and not in writing we call it a blocking foul.

[rainmaker]

Originally Posted by RonRef

I think if most of us see this play live and not in writing we call it a blocking foul.

Not me!! It's true that a lot of refs have trouble with B/C and tend to bail with an easier blocking call, but that doesn't make it the right call. Whoever is behind is almost always at fault, just like in driving. It's really very simple.

[RonRef]

Originally Posted by rainmaker

Not me!! It's true that a lot of refs have trouble with B/C and tend to bail with an easier blocking call, but that doesn't make it the right call. Whoever is behind is almost always at fault, just like in driving. It's really very simple.

I think if we had 100 guys in a room and showed this play on video it maybe split down the middle 50-50 block/charge!

[Kevzebra]

Originally Posted by rainmaker

Not me!! It's true that a lot of refs have trouble with B/C and tend to bail with an easier blocking call, but that doesn't make it the right call. Whoever is behind is almost always at fault, just like in driving. It's really very simple.

I agree Rain! Another reason we miss the offensive/block call is that most officials center his/her attention on the offensive player and do not expand his/her vision to include the defensive players. If we all would take a "trail mentality" on the floor (not looking at just A1-B1) and look at the plays that may be coming our way, we would rarely miss these calls!

[ChuckElias]

Originally Posted by RonRef

I think if most of us see this play live and not in writing we call it a blocking foul.

Why?

You wouldn't allow somebody to push an opponent from behind during rebounding action to get a put-back. Why would you allow a player to push somebody from behind for the initial shot? That doesn't make much sense to me.

[RonRef]

Originally Posted by ChuckElias

Why?

You wouldn't allow somebody to push an opponent from behind during rebounding action to get a put-back. Why would you allow a player to push somebody from behind for the initial shot? That doesn't make much sense to me.

Like any block/charge it is tough to comment when we actually don't see the play! If I see the paly I may indeed call it a Charge!

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by ChuckElias

Why?

You wouldn't allow somebody to push an opponent from behind during rebounding action to get a put-back. Why would you allow a player to push somebody from behind for the initial shot? That doesn't make much sense to me.

Maybe because some tend to view a push in the back on a rebound differently than this particular play, even more so if A1 runs into B1 as he's dunking the ball.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by RonRef

I think if most of us see this play live and not in writing we call it a blocking foul.

Disagree. I think that most officials actually know the rules and would get it right.

[SmokeEater]

Originally Posted by RonRef

I think if most of us see this play live and not in writing we call it a blocking foul.

Timing is an issue for me here. If the player turned his back and then it was a turn, bang situation, I might see it as a block. If player was already stationary with back to player driving its definately Player control.