charge or not

[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?

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

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?

Landing spot behind the basket is what I meant. You can't defend a shot from there.

But your example is one spot where the NCAAM rule is great. The bucket counts, call the foul.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Rich Fronheiser

Landing spot behind the basket is what I meant. You can't defend a shot from there.

But your example is one spot where the NCAAM rule is great. The bucket counts, call the foul.

If you can take away a shooter's desired path needed to complete the shot, how is it not defending the shot?

So if the NCAAM's idea is great, why not use it under the basket too.

[Ref in PA]

I had this exact play last night. NCAAM JV game. A1 drove the base line and B1 was set up, not exactly under the basket but close enough. A1 ran B1 over and I called the charge. Coach A did not like the call, but it did not change my mind. The offensive player needs to recognize the positioning of the defenders and adjust accordingly.

[SmokeEater]

Originally Posted by Ref in PA

I had this exact play last night. NCAAM JV game. A1 drove the base line and B1 was set up, not exactly under the basket but close enough. A1 ran B1 over and I called the charge. Coach A did not like the call, but it did not change my mind. The offensive player needs to recognize the positioning of the defenders and adjust accordingly.

Funny you say this because I had it last night as well in JV boys game (NCAA rules). In my case the defender moved under the basket after A1 took off for the layup. B1 realized he was not there in time and backed up to give the player room to land, as he landed B1 had some contact with A1 and IMO flopped back on his butt. I had NO CALL on the play as A1 was able to complete his layup and B took himself out of the play. No advantage/disadvantage was my judgement.

[btaylor64]

It is like JRut said. There is no one size fits all. We all need to understand that officiating is not an exact science, but instead it is an art, and depending on whether your art is beautiful or not is in the eye of the assignor you work for.

I personally call a block or no call a play when a secondary defender comes in and attempts to take a charge underneath the basket. If it is a primary defender then I just see the play through. Just to add something to this. I will call an offensive foul on an offensive player being defended by a secondary defender if the offensive player does something overt (i.e., leading with the foot or wiping out with the off hand, etc.)

People who are rule book officials are trying to make this a science and hence we would just be better off having robots referee the game. As an art there is room for human understanding and conception.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by btaylor64

1) I personally call a block or no call a play when a secondary defender comes in and attempts to take a charge underneath the basket. If it is a primary defender then I just see the play through.

2) People who are rule book officials are trying to make this a science and hence we would just be better off having robots referee the game. As an art there is room for human understanding and conception.

1) I personally believe that is absolutely terrible advice unless you're working in the NBA or doing a NCAA Womens college game. And believe me, Mr. Taylor is not working in the NBA and I doubt very much that he's doing Womens college games either, seeing that he had never officiated a high school game at any level in his life before this season started. What he is advocating goes not only goes completely against the direction of both the NFHS and NCAA Mens rule books, but it also goes against the way that supervisors and evaluators want the play called.

2) What gives you the right to make statements like that? You don't have the officiating experience to judge anybody, let alone judge experienced high school and college officials. All you're doing is trying to regurgitate something that you heard at one of your Jr. NBA/rec league games. That's nothing but rec league, Old School talk. Rule book officials are officials that know the rules. Well, you've certainly proved with your previous posts that you're not a rulebook official. If you would like to contest that, I'll be glad to go back and re-post some of your greatest hits.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Rich Fronheiser

But your example is one spot where the NCAAM rule is great. The bucket counts, call the foul.

And that used to be HS rule too, but I am told that it was changed because it was not being officiated properly. Too many officials were failing to correctly judge whether or not the ball had left the shooter's hand when the contact occurred. Thus the NFHS made it simple. They could have said that the shot always counts, but they elected to go with it never counts on a PC.