Read rules 4-41 and 6-7-9EXCEPTION(c), you f***ing moron. That's the applicable rule. Also read casebook play 6.7SitE. In that play, continous motion applies to a shooter who never does leave his feet. A "try" starts when the ball comes to rest in a player's hands to start the shooting motion, <b>NOT</b> when he leaves his feet. And continuous motion has got dick-all to do with the call anyway.

You just don't understand the basic rules concepts needed to call plays like this.

I said I was gonna ignore this idiot for the rest of this thread, but he is just stoopid beyond belief. Old School, when it comes to stupidity, you've raised the bar beyond the reach of mere mortal idiots.

Rule 4-27-5 has got dick-all to do with the call.The applicable rule, already cited, is rule 4-23-4(a). Again, Goofball, that rule says "Guarding an opponent <b>with the ball</b> or a stationary opponent without the ball..<b>NO</b> time or distance is required to <b>obtain an initial legal position</b>."

You just don't have a clue as to what you're talking about, but that'll never stop you.

New to this conversation. RookieDude, GREAT FREAKING CALL! As has been stated, it could have gone either way, but you made the correct call.

Wow, OldSchool, you sir are a freaking dumba$$! I'll try this approach with you then since you are so opposed to watching the feet and only watch from the waist (notice the correct spelling of waist). BTW, how do you call a travel if you don't watch the feet? In any case, where did the contact occur on the defense? It looked to me like he took the contact right smack dab in the middle of the chest. Are you telling me that the defense was that fast that he came from out of position (where contact may have occured on the shoulder or arm if at all) and got that position after the shooter went airborn? I don't know of many, if any, NBA players that can move that quick let alone ANY high school player.

One other question for you, do you not ever get tape from your games? I know you only call rec ball, but figured you might get someone to come tape your championship experience. You've never made a call on the court and then asked someone else, that saw it live or on tape, what they thought of the call? It didn't sound at all like RookieDude was questioning whether he got the call right at the time, just what we thought about it.

Time and distance are not a factor when judging contacts involving the ball handler on the floor (which means not airborne). This is basic basketball, in all rule sets.

That's the same in Italy: officiate the defense is what we are taught and what I teach to young officials. During the whole game, of course. If you want to call correctly a block-charge situation, the only way is to see whether the defensive player has got LGP. Be it at the beginning of the game or at the end.
I guess you mean the waist, don't you? Why should we look there before being sure if the defense has LGP? Stay deep beyond the baseline and you'll see feet, waist and hands.
Well, RookieDude did see correctly. It is possible, after all. He had a good angle and a good position: great job.

You have to know about the offensive player: if he is airborne or not. Not difficult, if you learn how to correctly officiate the defense.
That's what the rules say: if the defensive player has obtained LGP before the offensive player, the latter is responsible for the contact.

If you really think it is impossible to judge that contact, consider officiating something else, maybe bridge, where the play is not so fast as in basketball.

We're talking a matter of a split second if the defender was set and offense was airborne. It's really easy for us to sit back and say after the fact, it was cleary this or that. In real time, you got to make a decision and according to the way they want you to decide, you can't process all that in the span of time you was given. If you watch one or the other and you end up with a bias call. You watch both of them and the only definitive answer you can come back with is a block or incidental contact. With the game in the balance, I'm watching both players. Not mad at you if you call a CHARGE, I just think you guessed at the CHARGE, but as we all have stated, it was the OP call to make and he made it, kudo's to him. I would rather him come out with a CHARGE then a no-call.

Good discussion.

Call a block, then; live happy and continue to afflict basketball games with your moronic theories. I don't know in the US, but here nobody says to look from the waist up during the last seconds of a game. And I don't believe they do in the US, either.

Please, continue also to write in this forum: you are an endless source of wrong interpretation of the rules. Very good for gathering negative examples to show during association meetings.

Incidental contact? Come on! Well, if you are that kind of official who hides himself during the last seconds of a tight game, then a no-call would be the ideal decision. I prefer officials who have the heart to call what happens on the floor. Perhaps making mistakes, but not hiding themselves.

Actually, yes - Jon Diebler ran by so quickly that he couldn't be seen on the camera. Knocked Gweggie Paulus right on his tuchus.

Ok, Il give it a try...
"It's not about Old School. It's not about Old School..."

Sorry, not working. You're still a stupid dumb-a$$...

I think OS is just saying things to play games. He's just trying to stir the pot, to get under our skin or something.

The detail of the rule itself is the only way to get the play right. So, let's quote the whole rule and see how it applies.
This rule is pretty clearly not applicable when trying to determine whether a foul has occurred or by whom it was committed. It only becomes applicable, according to the excruciatingly clear wording, when you have already determined that a foul has been committed by the defense. Anyone with the reading ability beyond a first grade student could see this.

I'll say it again. I think you're really smarter than this, but faith can only hold out against incontrovertable scientific evidence for so long.

It's amazing how many pages this thread decreased when I added Old School back to my Ignore list. ;)

Sigh...I know.

I guess I always hope people can be helped. Maybe that's not always the case.

Old School:

I decided to stop pussy footing around with you. I am going to ask you very politely to read everything that I write in this post because: This weekend is the YMCA Great Lakes Zone Swimming Championships at The Ohio State University in Columbus, Ohio. Our younger son is representing the Toledo YMCA Peguins Swim Club in to Boys' 14U relays and instead of sitting in the hotel hot tub with my lovely wife, I am going to devote a lot of time to this post teaching you about guarding and screening. Unfortunately, I do not have my NFHS, NCAA, and FIBA Rules Books with me, many of the pertinent Rules, Casebook, and Approved Rulings have been quoted. This post is going to be part history of the rules, part rules, part case book and approved rulings, and part mechanics. All things that you, personally, need to understand so that you can correctly apply the rules in guarding and screening situations.

1) The guarding and screening definitions in all three rules codes have been unchanged for over fifty years; not withstanding Barb Jacobs idiotic interpretation of the legal guarding postion with regards to the NCAA Women's Rules because like you she was not a basketball official (a former coach) and was comletely ignorant of the how and why a rule is written the way it is.

2) The National Basketball Committee of the United States and Canada (the predecessor the the NFHS and NCAA Rules Committees adopted the current rules for guarding and screening over fifty years ago. The concept that an offensive player who is not airborne when he gains first gains control of the all, must expect to be guarded from the instant he gains control of the ball; in other words, the defensive player does not have to give time and distance when obtaining/establishing a legal guarding position against an offensive player in control of the ball as long as the offensive player was not airborne when he gained control of the ball. Time and distance only applies to guarding a offensive player without the ball or an offensive player who gains control of the ball while airborne. Time and distance also applies to all (My apologies to J. Dallas Shirley.) screening situations; it should be noted that screens can be set by all ten players on the court, i.e., the offensive player in control of the ball can set a screen against a defensive player and a defensive player can set a screen against an offensive player (including the offensive player in control of the ball).

3) Closesly guarded situations have nothing to do with obtaining/establishing a legal guarding position.

4) I repeat: Time and distance does NOT apply when obtaining/establishing a legal guarding position against an offensive player who is not airborne when he gains control of the ball.

5) The Act of Shooting and Continuous Motion have nothing to do with obtaining/establishing a legal guarding postition.

6) I repeat: Time and distance does NOT apply when obtaining/establishing a legal guarding position against an offensive player who is not airborne when he gains control of the ball.

7) Good officials officiate the defense. Yes, the Lead in a three-whistle officiating crew will normally be watching the offensive player with the ball from the waist up when that player is in the low post, it is wrong to say the the Lead must always watch the offensive player from the waist up to the exclusion of watching the whole play. In the play being discussed, the drive started in the Trails' primary, but the secondary defender was the Lead's resonsibiity and should be able to see both the offensive and defensive players in order to make this block/charge call. A good official develops the ablility to have to V's of vision: a vertical vision and a horizontal vision.

8) I repeat: Time and distance does NOT apply when obtaining/establishing a legal guarding position against an offensive player who is not airborne when he gains control of the ball.

9) In conversations with you you admitted that your posts revealed your rules knowledge was lacking but that should not equate to lack of ability. I have this to say to you: One may know the rules and casebook forwards and backwards and that person still may not have the ability to apply that knowlege on the court, but one cannot begin to be a good official unless he does have a command of the rules and casebook. Your lack of rules knowledge translates directly proportinal to your ability to correctly officiate the game.

10) I repeat: Time and distance does NOT apply when obtaining/establishing a legal guarding position against an offensive player who is not airborne when he gains control of the ball.

MTD, Sr.

just curious
 

Maybe I'm the only one with this question . . . but I'm wondering if time and distance would apply when obtaining/establishing a legal guarding position against an offensive player who is not airborne when he gains control of the ball? :D

Now that's the MTD we've all come to love. :D