Watta ya got video?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Old School

In your opinion I am doing an disservice to officiating. I beg to differ. Technically, the call was correct(blah blah blah)I got a BLOCK!!!!

I just want to thank you. As you've noted, I have a mission in life. A mission from God, if you will. That mission is to totally discredit you, an excellent official and good role model for new officials. My quixotic quest is made exponentially easier by posts such as this.
Again, sir, thank you.

[JoeTheRef]

Did anyone hear the final horn go off? Did they end regulation with the foul?

[tomegun]

Originally Posted by IUgrad92

I too, would like to think I am common sensical, but obviously am not as refined as you are. Maybe you were from southern Indiana......

Man, thanks for the smile! I'm not from southern Indiana. I'm Richmond.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by Old School

That's my point, the tape don't lie, but the L guessed at it! Again that's my point! You can't guess in this business. You got to be for sure of your call. In this particular stitch, there was no, no calling this play. The OP was forced to blow his whistle, he had to have something on this play. If you are the L you have to have a call here. Now, my 2nd or 3rd point, I'm losing track, but if you are not sure, always take the defense. If I'm calling offense, there's no guessing.

Old School:

Please tell you have not officiated in years and years and even then you were not very good, because your post above shows that you have absolutely no clue about officiating basketball or the rules.

MTD, Sr.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by IUgrad92

I too, officiate in Washington state, and the reason I made the comments I did was because that is how our association handles 'drives to the basket', from either wing. It was a point of emphasis in every pre-game of every varsity contest I did this year. L to have a patient whistle on a crash from a drive from either wing, C or T having first crack due to play originating from their primary. I never said that L should not have a whistle on such a play. I was just asking RD if their crew was applying that same philosophy or not.

Originally Posted by BLydic

And what does your pregame include regarding a drive to the basket when there's a crash with a secondary defender? IMO, Nevada got it correct in post #54.

Originally Posted by IUgrad92

To be honest, the whole complexity of a secondary, or even a third defender, etc. never came in the discussions. Plain and simple, C or T has the drive to the bucket and first crack at any collision/contact. The C or T absolutely may decide that they have nothing, but if the L sees something that warrants a whistle, then by all means, come in and get it.

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Not true....the T/C have primary coverage all the way in for players involved in the play all the way in. When the defender comes from somewhere else, the official covering that area has primary coverage. The T/C will NOT have a good look at a defender coming into the picture at the last second.

IUgrad92,
It is unfortunate, but you have been taught the mechanics of this play incorrectly. You are not the only one though as this is a subtle point that many officials fail to grasp. I have even seen people at association meetings teach the coverage of this play incorrectly. So it's not your fault, but it is your duty to learn something new and correct your thinking. Possibly you could even help enlighten those in your area who are not handling the secondary defender in this manner. The understanding that you have OVERsimplified the play. It is not that simple. People cannot say that the C or T has the play all the way to the basket and that's it. The play must be divided into primary and secondary defenders for the reasons that I gave back in post #54. Please listen to Camron and others who are telling you how to best use 3-man mechanics to cover these type of plays. You will improve if you do.

[IUgrad92]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

IUgrad92,
It is unfortunate, but you have been taught the mechanics of this play incorrectly. You are not the only one though as this is a subtle point that many officials fail to grasp. I have even seen people at association meetings teach the coverage of this play incorrectly. So it's not your fault, but it is your duty to learn something new and correct your thinking. Possibly you could even help enlighten those in your area who are not handling the secondary defender in this manner. The understanding that you have OVERsimplified the play. It is not that simple. People cannot say that the C or T has the play all the way to the basket and that's it. The play must be divided into primary and secondary defenders for the reasons that I gave back in post #54. Please listen to Camron and others who are telling you how to best use 3-man mechanics to cover these type of plays. You will improve if you do.

Absolutely! I'm not a crotchety ol' geezer, set in my 'old school' ways

[IUgrad92]

Originally Posted by tomegun

Man, thanks for the smile! I'm not from southern Indiana. I'm Richmond.

Ah, the Red Devils. Done a few games out there, nice gym. I was in the Indianapolis area when officiating, originally from the Ft. Wayne area.

I thought that southern Indiana comment might get you

[RookieDude]

zebraman and rockyroad...I thought maybe you guys might have seen the white team over in the Seattle area at the 3A tourney. Glad to see my fellow WA boys agree with the call...even if I am an "easterner".

Nevada and Camron...good job explaining the "secondary" defender, you hit it on the head as far as our pre-game goes!

IUgrad...see Nevada's explanation. I pre-game this EVERY game, and this game was no exception. Also, kudos to you for being willing to take this info and possibly using it. I heard this same kind of information on this very forum...and I would like to think, by using it, it made me a better official.
P.S. say Hi to Rockin' Rod, who I have worked with in the past, and that Dolittle guy whom I have worked with in the Spokane area this year. (Pasco vs. Shadle Park)

JR, M&M, BITS, Bob, Rich, MTD sr.,...good explanations, thumbs up!

Dan, Mark, Snags...funny, excellent observations.

Host of others with great comments...thanks.

Ol' school...you're killing me.

[jmaellis]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

.....

EDIT: In fact, if you imagine the wall shifting such that it is alway between the defender and shooter, you can even use it for situations where the shooter is going by the defender. In that case, if the defender is pushing the wall toward the shooter at the time of contact, they've lost LGP and get a block.

Again, it about the defender getting their body into the path before the shooter jumps...even if the defender is still moving. Any additional lateral movement will either be neutral or will lessen the contact.

Thank you for all that, it was helpful and appreciated. I'm glad I went back and reviewed the post and noticed the edit.

I understand the concept of the wall directly in front of the player and how a player who has established LGP who breaches the vertical plane in front of him by bring his arms down over an opposing player or who pushes the wall into an opponent has committed a foul (illegal use of the hands and blocking respectively??).

Disclaimer: The following is a question, not an opinion or an interpretation unless so stated. Any description of the event or non-event, the placement of the feet/hands/body of a player are for the sole purpose of thoroughly explaining the situation so that everything that might be important is included for the purpose of a through analysis.

What about a situation in which B1 who has established LGP and extends his arm, bent at the elbow directly in front of him at a 90 degree angle to the floor; A1, who is dribbling the ball then runs directly into the front of B1 who never moved his arm from in front of him. 4-23-1 states that a player who extends an arm into the path of an opponent is not considered to have legal position if contact occurs. Since the vertical wall in front of B1 begins right at his face/belly/arms (I'm assuming that you mean arms against the body or at the side), the contact with B1's forearm occurred beyond the wall and in the path of A1 who was headed directly for B1 (block?).

Is there any allowance given to B1 considering, that if he had not had his arm in front of him, A1 would have ran directly into his torso?

I'm asking the brain trust because this exact situation occurred right in front of me during a youth rec. game. I called a block, which met with many boos, moans and groans from the stands. My partner was an experienced official and backed me on the court, but later told me said that he would have called the PC because B1's arm didn't put A1 at a disadvantage as he was running directly into B1 and made no effort to change direction. A different experienced official told me that he would have called a blarge because even though B1 was technically wrong for having his arm out in front of him, A1 was going to run into him anyway. I haven't had the opportunity to discuss it further with other refs. Anybody have any advice?

[RookieDude]

Originally posted by jmaellis
A different experienced official told me that he would have called a blarge because even though B1 was technically wrong for having his arm out in front of him, A1 was going to run into him anyway.

An experienced official would have intentionally called a BLARGE?
Hmmmm, not I...the way you explained it sounds like a Player Control foul to me.

[jmaellis]

Originally Posted by RookieDude

An experienced official would have intentionally called a BLARGE?
Hmmmm, not I...the way you explained it sounds like a Player Control foul to me.

Yes, he would said he would have called a double foul; block on B1 and charge on A1. His rational was that he didn't want to call only the PC because B1 should not have had his arm out in front of him like that, and he didn't want to call only the block because if B1 arm hadn't been there A1 would have ran directly into him.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by jmaellis

Yes, he would said he would have called a double foul; block on B1 and charge on A1. His rational was that he didn't want to call only the PC because B1 should not have had his arm out in front of him like that, and he didn't want to call only the block because if B1 arm hadn't been there A1 would have ran directly into him.

Technically speaking...it would probably be a charge and illegal use of hands to make the double foul...which IS possible but not advised.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by jmaellis

What about a situation in which B1 who has established LGP and extends his arm, bent at the elbow directly in front of him at a 90 degree angle to the floor; A1, who is dribbling the ball then runs directly into the front of B1 who never moved his arm from in front of him. 4-23-1 states that a player who extends an arm into the path of an opponent is not considered to have legal position if contact occurs. Since the vertical wall in front of B1 begins right at his face/belly/arms (I'm assuming that you mean arms against the body or at the side), the contact with B1's forearm occurred beyond the wall and in the path of A1 who was headed directly for B1 (block?).

Is there any allowance given to B1 considering, that if he had not had his arm in front of him, A1 would have ran directly into his torso?

I'm asking the brain trust because this exact situation occurred right in front of me during a youth rec. game. I called a block, which met with many boos, moans and groans from the stands. My partner was an experienced official and backed me on the court, but later told me said that he would have called the PC because B1's arm didn't put A1 at a disadvantage as he was running directly into B1 and made no effort to change direction. A different experienced official told me that he would have called a blarge because even though B1 was technically wrong for having his arm out in front of him, A1 was going to run into him anyway. I haven't had the opportunity to discuss it further with other refs. Anybody have any advice?

Sounds like those arms are not extended "into" the path of the opponent. That rule is really refering to a player extending their arms to the side into the opponents path when their body is not in the opponents path.

The defender IS allowed to extend their arms in front of them to cushion an imminent blow....just as they are allow to duck or turn away from the contact to lessen the impact....and still draw the charge. They must be careful to only use the arms to cushion the blow and not push/hold/grab.

While I wouldn't advise calling a double foul on your play, I do see it as a charge unless the arms created some sort of advantage for the defender that didn't otherwise exist or did more than just have them out there.

[RookieDude]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Sounds like those arms are not extended "into" the path of the opponent. That rule is really refering to a player extending their arms to the side into the opponents path when their body is not in the opponents path.

The defender IS allowed to extend their arms in front of them to cushion an imminent blow....just as they are allow to duck or turn away from the contact to lessen the impact....and still draw the charge. They must be careful to only use the arms to cushion the blow and not push/hold/grab.

While I wouldn't advise calling a double foul on your play, I do see it as a charge unless the arms created some sort of advantage for the defender that didn't otherwise exist or did more than just have them out there.

Well stated Camron...I don't see too many double foul situations when one of the two players is dribbling the ball...usually one foul happens before the other, IMO...my double fouls usually happen in the post.

[IREFU2]

Originally Posted by RookieDude

Tie game...winner to state...watta ya got?

http://www.sportstricities.com/sport...-8578135c.html

I have a PC, looking at the slow motion replay, legal guarding position was established.