charge or not

[Nevadaref]

You asked the same question yesterday! Did you not care for those answers?

charge

And yet again I post this for our youthful fellow deecee. Perhaps one of these times he will absorb it, but until then he will carry on doing it his way.

NFHS 2006-07 Points of Emphasis

#5. Rules Enforcement and Proper Use of Signals. The committee has seen a movement away from the consistent application of rule enforcement and use of approved mechanics/signals.
A. Rules Enforcement. Officials need to be aware that personal interpretations of the rules have a negative impact on the game. The rules are written to provide a balance between offense and defense, minimize risks to participants, promote the sound tradition of the game and promote fair play. Individual philosophies and deviations from the rules as written negatively impact the basic fundamentals and tenants of the rules.


10.6.1 SITUATION C: B1 is standing behind the plane of the backboard before A1 jumps for a lay-up shot. The forward momentum causes airborne shooter A1 to charge into B1. RULING: B1 is entitled to the position obtained legally before A1 left the floor. If the ball goes through the basket before or after the contact occurs, the player-control foul cancels the goal. However, if B1 moves into the path of A1 after A1 has left the floor, the foul is on B1. B1's foul on the airborne shooter is a foul during the act of shooting. If the shot is successful, one free throw is awarded and if it is unsuccessful, two free throws result. (4-19-1, 6; 6-7-4; 10 Penalty 2, 5a)

[deecee]

ok go ahead and call it -- i am not saying not to call it -- when i played i never expected that call and when i coached i never wanted that call. but again thank you for typing out the rulebook I will have to go back to high schooland berate my english teacher for not teaching me how to read text in red and blue that is bold.

from what i read in the rulebook and what i see as far as contact blah -- contact blah -- contact blach differs so please spare me the mumbo jumbo of all contact is blah -- because in application and reality the 2 might not match up -- but I do like how you have learned to read and type in the rulebook -- its a great skill that I need as I am looking for a personal assistant and your skill set of reading and typing and even correcting grammar will be perfect. Of course the pay isnt that great and the hours are kinda long 8hrs. a day but hey you get weekends off and most importantly you get to read and type -- 2 things I have learned that you love to do.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by deecee

i generally dont reward bad defense -- and just standing under the basket/backboard isnt good defense IMO -- usually no call from the instances I have seen this.

No call if the shooter knocks the defender inti the third row?

Did it ever cross your mind that if you do make that call you're rewarding good defense and penalizing a bad decision by the shooter?

[deecee]

wow 3rd row from the endline -- either the shooter was shaq charging into a freshman girl or we are getting a bit WOW -- but should the contact BE THAT severe I will call the foul and then proceed to call an ambulance -- and yes a layup is always a BAD decision by a shooter.

I only stated what I would do in this instance and I will not lose any sleep if someone says they will do the opposite. But I like that 3rd row knock back -- can I offer some what ifs as well -- what if the shooter never intened to shoot but just decleate the defender (POW!!!!) -- or what if a blue duck flies in and steals my partners whistle and blows out of his primary and calls this PC and I actually blow the whilstle and we have a blarge. Do i defer to the duck? strange? yes. bizarre? yes? -- 3rd row knockback during a BAD layup just as strange and bizarre IMO.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by deecee

wow 3rd row from the endline -- either the shooter was shaq charging into a freshman girl or we are getting a bit WOW -- but should the contact BE THAT severe I will call the fouland then proceed to call an ambulance -- and yes a layup is always a BAD decision by a shooter.

I get it. You don't call fouls because they actually are fouls. You only call fouls if you personally feel the severity of the contact actually warrants a foul call.

Soooooo......
1) if the defender gets knocked into the second row, would you call a foul?
2) if the defender gets knocked into the first row, would you call a foul?
3) if the defender gets knocked down but lands short of the stands, would you call a foul?
4) if the shooter gives the defender a double eye-poke like Moe used to do to Curley, is that a foul?

Yup speaking of "bizarre", I was just wondering how you apply that "severity of contact" philosophy of yours in game situations.....

[deecee]

so all contact is a foul jr? its a judgement call and in MY judgement this contact where players are flying into the first/second/third row is NOT going to happen.

4) only if the defender responds with a "yuck, yuck, yuck"

[Kostja]

Why is that question such a big deal, really? There is a philosophy (HS as I understood it) that a player control foul should be called regardless of the position of the defender ... So, if that's what the governing body in that league wants, go ahead and call it that way. But there are other philosophies in other leagues, and maybe it is worth to think about them for a moment. Just think about it and the ideas behind it, don't use it if your league wants you to do otherwise!

As crazyvoyager said, in FIBA's world the rules don't offer a semi circle or anything like it to protect the shooter. but the prevailing philosophy is that defense should be played in front of the basket, not underneath it or even behind the backboard. This is probably because we'd like to see more baskets scored instead of referees waving them off because of player control fouls ... By the way, a charging after the shot (ball left the hand) wouldn't be a player control foul over here, and the basket would count even though a foul has been called on the shooter. Is that really different in HS, that it is still a PC foul, when the ball has already left the shooters hand? Oh, and one more thing regarding this philosophy ... we mix some advantage/disadvantage into it as well. If the shooter charges into the defender, who is planted underneath the basket, and he misses the layup it must be called as a foul by the offensive player! Why? Because he knocks the defender out of the picture for the ensuing rebound situation, and that would be a clear disadvantage. What are your thoughts on this? And before you ask, yes I like it. If you apply that rule consistently it creates a nicely flowing game, with charging calls where needed and baskets where defense just tries to play for a charge without trying to defend the basket. An occasional late call because of a missed shot with a charge ... I love it

[BillyMac]

From Kostja: "There is a philosophy (HS as I understood it) that a player control foul should be called regardless of the position of the defender"

Kostja: You understand it wrong. The defender cannot be out of bounds. This rule change was made a few years ago. Of course this change goes along with all the other rules regarding legal guarding postion.

[Texas Aggie]

and just standing under the basket/backboard isnt good defense IMO

What if there was absolutely nowhere else for the defender to go as the other places on the floor around the player he seeks to guard are taken and he doesn't wish to foul the player? Maybe the offensive player will drive the baseline under the basket looking for an outlet shooter.

You can't make a blanket statement about this. Usually, they are underneath the basket because that's the quickest place they can get to and be in a legal guarding position. How is that bad defense?

The NBA rule is stupid and designed to give the offensive player added protection that neither the NCAA nor Fed codes generally allow. They do it because the NBA is a show, not a competition.

[Kostja]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

From Kostja: "There is a philosophy (HS as I understood it) that a player control foul should be called regardless of the position of the defender"

Kostja: You understand it wrong. The defender cannot be out of bounds. This rule change was made a few years ago. Of course this change goes along with all the other rules regarding legal guarding postion.

Thanks for the clarification. I never even thought about someone "playing defense" out of bounds To me this looks just as weird as playing defense behind the backboard oder underneath the basket

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Texas Aggie

What if there was absolutely nowhere else for the defender to go as the other places on the floor around the player he seeks to guard are taken and he doesn't wish to foul the player? Maybe the offensive player will drive the baseline under the basket looking for an outlet shooter.

You can't make a blanket statement about this. Usually, they are underneath the basket because that's the quickest place they can get to and be in a legal guarding position. How is that bad defense?

The NBA rule is stupid and designed to give the offensive player added protection that neither the NCAA nor Fed codes generally allow. They do it because the NBA is a show, not a competition.

Frankly, I think it's likely to be a block a heckuva lot more often than if the defender is actively playing defense in front of the basket.

Why? Not because I advocate ignoring the rule. It's because it's much more likely that the defender hasn't established LGP before A1 became an airborne shooter. It's a long time between A1 leaving the floor and subsequently hitting B1 positioned under the basket on a typical layup.

BTW, I don't think it's a stupid semicircle, either -- if the only way one can defend against a layup is to position himself in A1's landing spot, he ought to cede the bucket, IMO -- but that's not relevant as I can't imagine working a game under those explicit conditions any time soon.

[JRutledge]

The bottom line for me is there is a reality to what we call to what the rule says. As long as you are consistent, that is all the counts. We can debate what the rule says or what the rule does not say. I will say I have yet to see a player stand behind the basket and be in complete LGP. So a player that is behind the basket to me is suspect. I just cannot say that there is a one size fits all.

Peace

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Rich Fronheiser

BTW, I don't think it's a stupid semicircle, either -- if the only way one can defend against a layup is to position himself in A1's landing spot, he ought to cede the bucket, IMO -- but that's not relevant as I can't imagine working a game under those explicit conditions any time soon.

So, with that philosophy, you don't think B1 should be able to take a charge on A1's running jumpshot around the FT line if A1 pancakes B1 well after the release and just before A1 lands?

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by deecee

from what i read in the rulebook and what i see as far as contact blah -- contact blah -- contact blach differs so please spare me the mumbo jumbo of all contact is blah -- because in application and reality the 2 might not match up -- but I do like how you have learned to read and type in the rulebook -- its a great skill that I need as I am looking for a personal assistant and your skill set of reading and typing and even correcting grammar will be perfect. Of course the pay isnt that great and the hours are kinda long 8hrs. a day but hey you get weekends off and most importantly you get to read and type -- 2 things I have learned that you love to do.

It would take a lot more than eight hours per day to bring your lousy writing skills up to par.

[BillyMac]

From Kostja: "I never even thought about someone "playing defense" out of bounds"

In the last century, when I was in high school, my coach would teach us to play defense along the sideline with one foot touching the boundary line, especially in a trapping situation with a teammate coming in from the center of the court to set up a two-man trap. This was to insure that the offensive player didn't even have an inch to dribble by us along the sideline. In the past, I could set up with a foot on the boundary line and legally "take a charge". Not anymore. The rule changed a few years ago so that in order to have "legal guarding postion", the defender has to have both feet completely in bounds.