Block/Charge?
 

So I was looking around on youtube and I found an interesting clip.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=D_bqm8bbFK8

What do you have on the call? My intial reaction was to say block, (since I had originally thought the defender got legal guarding position in the path of the ballhandler after he was airbone) but after looking at it a couple of times, it looked like the ballhandler was given space to land. Since he's a ballhandler, time and distance do not apply to the play and therefore player control.

What are y'alls thoughts?

I got a block.

Both feet were on the floor, the defender was facing the offensive player, the offensive player landed, he had the ball, time and distance aren't needed, ...

Tough one. I hate these. In real time, I think I would have gone with the block as it appears the defender arrived late. I would have felt good about getting it right... In slowing it down and reviewing, it looks like defender had LGP and following the rule, should have been player control. Self-doubt can be the kiss of death in this line of work.

I'm right there with you. At normal speed I was thinking "This one is easy. why is there a question?" Seeing again in slow motion..."Well, not so much."

Related question...Would it have been better if the calling official had quickly taken a few long strides toward the play? When everyone got around to looking at him he would have appeared to be "right on it".

Easy call.

Charge.

But's let's break this down...why did the L on the other side of the court take this call?

And am I the only one who can see the wheels spinning as he's walking to the table? Someone should have given him a coin to toss before reporting the foul.

The reason the new L took the call is because in a 2-person system, he had the best angle. The new Trail has no chance of getting that call right from where's he must come from.

No doubt he was thinking about what he was going to call, and I think he reason correctly. Not being right on top of the play, they had to have something on this play. Calling it on the defense was the safe call to make.

Now, you go and call offense, next thing you know, you got guys running up underneath each other the rest of the game. I'm not trying to find the needle in the haystack. We're going to keep it simple. Also, the defender should have gone for the steal of the ball instead of trying to draw the tough call from the official. Odds or not in the players favor to get the correct call here, but the way the offensive player turned and stepped, chances where better of stealing the ball here.

The out of shape T wasn't going to get a look at the play.

I agree!, but I think he handled it well. It didn't look much like he didn't know what to call.

I agree as well. But I don't question anyone who has a block. In real-time, it could look like a block, and I think many would call that. Just as long as they're consistent during the game.

Whatinthehell are you talking about? There was no contact until <b>after</b> the player with the ball landed. There was nobody running up underneath anybody on this play. :rolleyes: As usual, you don't understand the basic principles needed to make the correct call.

Obvious charge.

PC foul all the way.

Peace

Let me understand your thinking here. You're going to base a call on how you THINK players will respond the rest of the game? Wouldn't it be safer to APPLY A RULE here? or at least try to reason through it based upon a rule or your interpretation of how the play relates to a rule? Isn't that kinda what officials do?

Are you really an official?

You're trying to understand OS's thinking? Why would you want to?

Amazing, isn't it? I can see any official maybe missing a bang-bang call like this in real time. What I can't see is anybody trying to justify whatever call they made by using the nonsense that OS comes up with.

Bullsh1t.

The T had the better angle. The L was ahead of the play and across the floor, not even with it and across the floor.

I theroy you are correct. However, given how long it took the T to entire the picture while the L was reporting it is probably safe to assume he was out of position to make the call. He SHOULD have had a better angle...but likely didn't. :( Given how fast you heard the whistle, the L didn't give his partner a chance to make the call...so he can't argue that "someone had to get it." Both officials messed up.

That's BS, you don't understand position. There is no way the new T can determine the defensive players position (legal or otherwise) from the baseline. The new L has the best angle/look to get that play, or in 3 person, the center official. No way can the new T make a accurate judgment of that call from the baseline and the contact happen at mid-court. Plus, to add, he would have been seriously straight-lined. If the contact happen on the other side of the court, without a player/s stepping in front of him, he's got a better chance to make a ruling. On this play, not a chance....

Your turn, Dan.

http://www.fotosearch.com/comp/BDX/BDX345/bxp65528.jpg

Me?

Nah.

It's victory enough that it disagrees with me.

:shrug:

Dang it; I'm disappointed.

I'm goin' to lunch then if there's nothing to watch here.

Is anyone else having trouble with this video? It seems that I can get any YouTube video to load except for the two that have been posted on the basketball forum.

Damn right. I'm sending the message right now. Don't want players running underneath other players after they catch the ball in an attempt to draw the foul. Would you want someone to run underneath you everytime you catch the ball with your back turned? Damn right, this is how the games going to be called today.

Totally agree, but disagree with the "safer" term you used here. Safety has nothing to do with the rule. It's about getting there first. I seemed the worse type of falls when a player runs underneath another player and he loses his balance and lands very hard, very awkward. It is not safe to run underneath a player who can not see you coming, in any forum of basketball, even though by NFHS rule it is legal. This is why the professionals removed this from their rules. You must give a player a step, or before the player takes his final step to shoot. I will admit one thing about your statement bad zebra, this is one reason why I call a block on this type of play, for "safety" reasons.

9 times out of ten, that play is going to be rule a block anyway. With these type of odds, I would teach my players to go for the steal of the ball instead of trying to draw the offensive foul. Not saying I'm right. I'm just saying the odds are more in my favor to get the steal than the offensive foul.

I don't understand the problem with the new L making this call. Aren't we supposed to transition with our heads turned toward and no further ahead of the play than necessary?

The new T was still on the baseline when the contact occurred. The new L was not even in the picture, so he could very well have had been in a good position to make the call.

However, based on the lack of an immediate signal, the uncertain stroll to the table (and the fact that he made the wrong call), it would have been easier to just use the quarter.

Great justification for a 3rd person.

So safety of the players is nonsense. As long as everytime that play occurs in my game I call it a block. Nobody going to have a problem with it, except maybe you and your click of stress out officials. Easy call for me, I'll sleep good tonight.

I just had to say something. The rules are in place for a reason. Basketball is a contact sport. Safety is not a factor unless the rules spell it out. You cannot just make it up because you have a personal issue with safety. If the players want to be safe, play chess. This is a contact sport where people are trying to prevent movement. Next then you will tell us that you will call an illegal screen on a player because no one told the screener that a screen was coming. After all you have to maintain safety for a legal play because there is a possibility someone might get hurt right?

You are one of the most incompetent people I have ever read on this board. My God, when will you get a clue? It appears to be never.

Peace

Its like a really bad car wreck! You just can't look away. Gee I hope no one gets hurt in there.......

You go and call PC foul here, and before you know it, you have guys playing defense all game. We can't have that, now, can we?

As for what's in red above, you're not a coach. We can't make calls based on whether we think the kid made the "smarter" play; only whether he made a legal play. I can just see it now; "Coach, your kid was fouled, but I didn't call it because he hasn't made his free throws all night and he should have taken the three-point shot rather than drive the lane and hope for a tough call from the officials."

A wise man once said, "It is better for a man to remain silent, and have people think he is a fool, than for that man to open his mouth and remove all doubt." Congratulations - you have removed any doubt.

C'mon, quit drinking that Kool-Aid that coaches and players are feeding you, Old School. You have just admitted you would base you calls or no-calls on what you, or other people feel is "safe", vs. actually using the rules. That's too bad.

If you are an official, it is officials like you that give the rest of us bad names. Hey, don't shoot the messenger.

Are we getting a little off-track here? Better break out the popcorn.

Naw, your calls are nonsense. You don't know or understand basic rules concepts. That's why it <b>is</b> such an easy call for you in your rec league games to call this play a block. The reason that the players also might not have a problem with your calls in your rec league games is that they don't know any better either. It's rec league, not organized basketball. Fortunately, real, live, honest-to-goodness basketball officials do know the difference, and none of them would ever agree with you.

For all of you non-Old Schools reading, Bob Jenkins laid out the basics of what to look for in his post #3. NFHS rules 4-23-2 and 4-23-4(a) tell you how to call the play. That's why the correct call is a charge. NCAA rules are the same.

I realize that we're not going to get Old School's account pulled. So how about if I'm deputized as a moderator only for purposes of deleting his posts? Plus, I'll delete the porn spam from the General Forum (after forwarding any pictures to Jurassic, of course).

http://www.forumspile.com/Post-Stupid-Dont_listen.gif

That again ties with the dumbest statement ever made on this forum.

Can you point me at the NFHS rule that says that it is legal to run under an airborne player?

Btw, the offensive player with the ball in the video <b>isn't</b> airborne when the contact occurs. Don't let that little <b>fact</b> disturb your analysis of the play.

Stupid monkey....... :rolleyes:

Maddening, ain't it?

Who else can turn any rules discussion into a trainwreck quicker than our beloved JMO of McGriffs fame, the king of the trolls?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...arney-Fife.jpg

Careful, you only get one bullet.

If you forward them to me as well, I'll consider voting you into the clique.

The rules are in place for a reason. Let's start there. The rules or the restrictions the rules place upon the players are intended to create a balance of fair play, to provide equal opportunity for the offense and defense, to provide reasonable safety and protection....

HOLD THE PHONE!!!!

That's right there in the rules! Let me get this right, I am incompetent because I use safety as a guideline to make a decision. Shame on me for acting like a human being and using such realistic factors as safety to make my decision.

I am of the opinion it is officials like you who ruin the sport for others because of your asinine inability to utilized all factors available to you to make a decision. The only thing you see and use to make a judgment is the rulebook. Not only do I use the rule, I also use the intent and purpose of the rule before I make a decision, and yes, I got block, block, block on this play each and everytime I see it.

In the event I did not get a proper look at the play, I'm in the new Lead position and transitioning up the court. I might use other factors available to me like safety, intelligent decision of the player, and so on to make a judgment. But that's just me. Sorry I disagree but don't hate me because I back up what I say. It may not be right, but it's going to be like that on both ends of the court today. BLOCK!!!!

In the OP, no one "ran underneath" anyone, no one's safety was threatened, and in fact, when the official called a block, several parents WERE upset, which you say they wouldn't be. So even by your standards this is a bad call. Just WOW!

1) Naw, you're incompetent because you use "safety" as an excuse for not knowing basic rules.

2) Bad JRut! Bad, bad JRut! Using the rules to make a call. That's just wrong!:D

3) In other words you <b>guess</b>. But that's just <b>you</b>, JMO.

Good idea. When are you going to start?


That's correct - you should be using the rules as the guidelines for making the decisions.

This is also quoted from your post, but I'm borrowing it:

I am of the opinion it is officials like you who ruin the sport for others.

Methinks that it'll have to be a silver bullet. A regular bullet just ain't gonna work on this clown.

That's right JR but here's the problem. When observing this from the new L position, in transistion, I am unable to determine exactly when said feet of the defender was set and said feet of the offensive player was set. Therefore, what do we do. We got to have a call on this play. We can not no-call this play. The defensive player forced my hand. Well, when I'm unsure. Defense. Sorry, that be the way it is.

With instant replay, okay, guess I was wrong. Oh well, that be the way it is. Too bad we can't use replay on every call we make. I'm not trying to be perfect, like you, just trying to be consistent and stay out of trouble.

Sheez, Dinosaur, he agrees with you and you complain about it?

Sorry, JMO, but <b>real</b> officials will know what to look for, will know the correct rule, and will also know how to apply those rules to make the right call. The Old Schools of the world will guess. Real officials won't.

Sorry, that be the way it is.

So if I'm understanding this correctly Old School, you're willing to completely ignore and willingly misapply the rules of the game? Doesn't seem exactly fair to either team who think their playing by the rules of the game. Do you happen to tell the teams which rules you'll happen to be enforcing from game to game?:confused:

He won't be properly enforcing any of them because he doesn't know them and refuses to learn. You can't enforce what you don't know.

OS:

And why, pray tell is this a block? Please quote rules and casebook plays to support your call.

MTD, Sr.

OS:

After reading your post, all I can think of is the words of the immortal Bugs Bunny: "What a maroon!"

MTD, Sr.

M&M:

That is cold. :D

MTD, Sr.

Next thing you know, Old School will be telling us he makes the teams use foam balls because someone could jam their finger trying to block a shot. But then again, since he won't allow players to play defense there won't be any attempts to block a shot. http://forums.bucknuts.com/images/sm...stirthepot.gif

I will step up and admit...as I said early in this discussion...I would have called a block. This is, of course, assuming I was the new Trail...I would not have made the call from the apparent position of the new Lead (I say apparent judging from his position and direction of movement when the camera gets to him).

I will also admit I would have kicked the call. The replay clearly shows that. I will not, however, attempt to justify my erroneous decision...like some here are trying to do (read OS). If the coach complains I would just tell him that based on my assessment of the action it was the correct call.

Old School, it must be nice to post in complete anonymity. Maybe it's time to create your public file, let everyone here know where you are from(maybe insert a picture). As a new official, I come here to this forum to learn as much as I can. Your posts here are not helpful at all. If you are posting solely just to agitate and fulfill your warped sense of humor, might I suggest getting a full time job to occupy your time.

Stop reading his posts. If you have judged what he says does not apply, just stop paying that close of attention. It is really easy to do with this guy anyway. You might read occasionally, but just get a laugh. After all, this place is for entertainment purposes.

Peace

Then stay far, far away from Old School. Thankfully, you seem to recognize that already.

[QUOTE=LarryS]I will step up and admit...as I said early in this discussion...I would have called a block. [QUOTE]

Hey, I would have also looking at it in full speed...that's a pretty close call. Slow-mo shows it is a PC, but man, that would be hard to make that call at full speed...

I agree that this is a very close call and the expectation to get this call perfect is really not realistic. Having said all that, I tend to error on the side of the calling something on the offense. Not sure I would have seen the player get to the floor first, but this is why we get paid the big bucks after all.

Peace

So, when viewing the video, would you say those are real officials are fake officials? When viewing the video and considering the officials position in the play, do you agree with the call? Remember, they don't have the benefit of replay of this play. Faced with this outcome, do you think the official guess at the call?

When I look at this play, 2 person. I see block. The same call that the official in the video made. Maybe I'm not helping but I'm just being real. 9 times out of ten, officials are coming out of this call with a block. THE VIDEO DON'T LIE!!! Hey, it's the wrong call but we needed replay to verify. When working in the games we don't have the benefit of replay. So you better get in position to make the call, and if not, and you are focred to make the call. What do you call? I gonna call an offensive foul and I'm not sure! I don't think so! I'm going to call a defensive foul and not be sure! What are you gonna call? Are you gonna go with a no call here? You tell me, what are you gonna call here?

My position is simply, if you are not sure, call the obivous. It looked like a block from where I'm standing. Next time, don't force me to call it. God help us if we're going to start using replay after every call we make. The replay is great to show this is really an offensive foul, but it is also equally bad to show that we made a mistake here. If this is the direction we are heading, our profession is going to take a hell of a beating for the days to come. We're simply not going to get every call right. My position on this call is it was a good call. I support the officials here because of their position on the court and the defense force their hands. My position is I would rather you call a block here than a no-call, this is not incidental contact. Faced with those odds, it is better for the defense to go for the ball in this scenario.

Now, don't shoot the messenger. Remember, we live in America and it's okay to have a different opinion, even if that opinion goes against everyone else. I don't agree with the war either.

When I saw the video live, I thought PC foul all the way. Why did I come to that conclusion? I have been trained to watch the referee the defense so that plays like this will not just blow up in your face. If you have been doing that these calls can be very easy to make.

First of all this is not about you being a messenger. You keep saying this stupid line and it has nothing to do with anything. You are not sending a message. You are given an opinion that is based on lunacy. Secondly this is not an "obvious foul." I have admitted it is one of those either/or fouls where some would call this one way and another group would call this play another way. While keeping this in mind, you will not get a pass from me or others when you miss this call. I do not give my self a pass and I will not give others as you move up the ranks. For an official that claims he knows more than just a rec. official, then I would expect more from you (not really but let us dream for a moment). If you really are as good as you say you are you should do a lot better than just calling what is safe. Even when you call things that are save you will make the "obviously" wrong call. This call is not obvious, but it was close to being that way.

Also for the record I do not see anything wrong for who made this call. The New L has likely a cleaner look at this play while the New T is looking through the back of the players and only sees the contact. The New T can see space and see when contact occurred.

Peace

Looking at this video, it seems obvious that the defense is set and in LGP before the offensive player's feet hit the floor, although it is a close call. However, does the offensive player get no allowance for forward motion? Also it seems that upon landing, the offensive player does make an effort to avoid contact. Are forward motion and an attempt to avoid contact only considered in determining if the defense has set a legal screen and opposed to playing the offensive player with the ball?

I think it's based on commen sense. This was an obvious foul that we needed a whistle on. We can not, no-call this contact. That is what I meant by obvious foul. If you're not sure because you are in transistion, what are you gonna call?

#1) I don't claim anything, I leave that up to you. Believe what you want to believe. Along this line of thinking, I believe this forum has a need, a great urge to want to hate others, but what's surpirising is how hard you turn on your own. In any event, if the defense forces me to put air in the whistle, and I'm not in a good position (in transistion) to make a good judgment on the play. If you want to call it the safe call, all I can say is a referee has never been reprimented or suspended for making a safe call. Not making a call, could be devastating to your career.

No, he doesn't.Not relevant here, I'm afraid. When the player being screened has the ball, time and distance ("forward motion") are not relevant. Again, neither is the attempt to avoid contact; only the severity and responsibility for contact is relevant here.

Time and distance are irrelevant for an offensive player in control such as in this video. On the other hand, if the offensive player did not have the ball in the video, then the foul would have been on the defense, correct? Going further, what would the correct call be if the offensive player had touched but fumbled the ball and not had control when the contact was made?

As I looked at this in real time, my first reaction was "block." After reading the thread, I can understand the PC foul call. I do have a question.

A1 lands with his left foot between the feet of B1 (A1's left foot near B1's right foot). A1 turns, weight shifting forward over his left foot and starts the dribble at the same time making contact with B1, not moving the left foot. Because the foot is between the defender's feet, would this be considered not allowing the offensive player to land, even though contact was not made on the actual landing?

This must make you feel better, but I have to break it to you. No one here "hates" you. We just disagree with virtually everything you say. Comical. "I didn't want to put air in my whistle. I'd have gotten away with it, too, if it weren't for you darned kids."I'd be willing to be money that an official has been reprimanded, suspended, and/or non-retained for making what he/she thought was the "safe call."
The "safe call" is another word for the "chicken-sh!t call."

So, are you talking about safety for the players ro safe for the career of the official? Your references to "safe" are a little muddled.


There are more possibilities than either "the safe call" or "not making a call". There is also "making the right call", which in the OP is a charge.

This play has nothing to do with common sense. We are not talking about calling an intentional foul on this play. And I did not say anything about not calling a foul either. Do you actually read what people say to you?

Why would you not be in good position? I guess that is a common excuse you seemed to give.

No one has been reprimanded for making the safe call? It is obvious you know little about officiating (not that we did not already know this) but for the newer people this comment proves it.

Peace

See Jeff, you can't help youself, can you?

:D

The difference is I know who I am dealing with. I do not expect it to change. I will take on his point of view when it is appropriate. I am not trying to demean him like many others.

Peace

Maybe because he doesn't <b>know</b> what position that he should be in?

When you don't own the mechanics books and have never received any training, you do what Old School does. You go where you want to and then guess.

That's funny! :D

Which is exactly my point. Most officials as can be determined by reading this thread alone, initially comes out with a block. Most everyone had to view it a 2nd time to come away with PC. The officials on the floor didn't have that luxary. Only a few of us said PC right off the bat. Now, realistically speaking, combine that with the fact you are in transition, how can you honesty say for sure what this call is? If you are unsure, which is my point that nobody wants to acknowledge or attempt to answer, but if you are unsure. What is your call?

Now, to my 2nd point. We all know what the right call is. The problem is, the majority of the time this happens in a game it's going to be ruled a block. Not every time but the majority of the time. Like it or not, as JR said, that be the way it is. Now, if you disagree with that, my opinion is like what JRut stated, lunacy. If you agree with that assessment that by-in-large most of the time this will be called a block. Then we can draw some meaningful conclusions from it. Like, it might not be in the best interest for the defender to do, being that most of the time it’s going to be ruled a block. You don’t coach your players to do things that most likely will go against you, imo. It’s just like the dribbler trying to dribble between 3 people, more than likely he’s going to get the ball stolen and not the foul call for the contact when he tried to go between them.

A wise man once said; play smart, referee smart, referee smart, referee career longer and more enjoyable.

The sad part is that he actually admits to it and doesn't see anything the matter with it either.

Which is exactly my point. You're the only goofus that viewed it a second time in slo-mo and <b>still</b> said it was a block. That's because you don't have know or understand basic rules and how to apply those basic rules. You could see that video a hundred times and you wouldn't know what to look for unless somebody laid it out beforehand, like Bob Jenkins did in the third post of this thread. And even with Bob laying it out then, you still got it wrong---over and over and over.

WOBW, JMO.

Whatever......!

??????????

WOBW = Waste Of BandWidth

OS:

While I will admit that this was a bang-bang play, if one referees the defense, he will get the play correct almost everytime. This play met all of the rule critera for a charge.

Your reasons for call this a block is shear nonsense. Your reasons are not logical nor do they follow the rules. As I have stated many times in the past, officiating using your illogical and incorrect interpretations of the rules, does a disservice to the game of basketball. Please take an officiating class and learn how to officiate basketball. And maybe you should stop hiding behind your nom de plume. Fill out your profile and use your real name.

MTD, Sr.

That was not your point 4 pages ago. 4 pages ago, you were talking about keeping the players safe by calling block regardless of the actual play. On this play, if I'm unsure, I'm calling a charge. My philosophy is that if the defender is that close as to make it a question, he/she deserves the credit. That is the right call. If I'm watching the defender (which by the way, is the way to do it) and it's so close I can't tell, then it's a charge every time.

Just because the majority of the time this will be called a block DOES NOT MAKE IT THE RIGHT CALL. Sheez, OS, whose side are you on anyway? The Coach? But then, I'm not sure what coach would want you. Most coaches that I know that acutally do coach real high school ball, DO coach their kids to set up for the charge. Of course they don't coach their kids to dribble between the defenders, since it's just plain stupid. Setting up to take the charge is just great play, and coaches DO WANTR THEIR KIDS TO DO IT.

That wise man has lousy English.

Sorry nobody has answered your good questions, but this thread has basically been hijacked. Also, someone should please correct me if I'm wrong, since I don't have my books with me to confirm my answer, which is:

In both of your situations, the offensive player would not have control of the ball which means the time/space criteria applies, which means it is a block in both of your situations. Fumbles by definition mean no control, so you cannot call a player control foul.

Time and distance does not apply to a player in control of the ball and is not airborne. The player in the original post had control of the ball and was not airborne when the defensive player obtained/established a legal guarding position. More the fifty years ago the Rules Committee affimred that an offensive player should expect to be guarded from the instant he ganed control of the ball. It was this expectation of being guarded is the foundation for how the guarding/screening rules are written.

MTD, Sr.

This is actually a very good question. It was discussed at some length in this recent thread:

http://forum.officiating.com/showthr...=time+distance

I realize that. I was answering dkmz's questions as what would be the call if the offensive player did not have control of the ball. Sorry for not clarifying that.

You are forgiven and I grant you dispensation. Say ten Hail Mary's and do not let it happen again. :D

MTD, Sr.

Actually, Mark, it's you who owes penance since you're the one who misunderstood his intent. :D

You need to defend ten Hail Mary's under the watchful eye of Touchdown Jesus.

Go Buckeyes!!

MTD, Sr.

Since DKMZ's old question was answered, maybe mine will be also if I rephrase. B1 gets position as in the video, A1 lands with his left foot clearly between the feet of B1 (in the actual video it is not that cut and dry) - no contact on landing, A1 turns, weight shifting forward but not outside the verticle plane of A1, A1 begins dribble and at the same time makes contact with B1. Do we still have the charge?

From your description, it sounds like it's still a charge, especially with no contact on landing. I can't really say for sure without seeing it. I did see the video at the start of this thread though, and imo it certainly was cut and dried that it was a charge. No doubt at all in my mind on that one.

What Bob Jenkins posted back in post #3 on page 1 is still valid. You allow the player with the ball to land. If he lands without contact, you can't have a foul. After that, the LGP rules take over and no time/distance is necessary on the part of the defender.

?????????????????????

Written without thinking, obviously. I went back and changed it.

Thanks, Juulie.

You're welcome, but I didn't do it for your sake. It was just that seeing you agree with OS threatened to jerk the rug right out from under my entire worldview. I knew, I just knew, you didn't mean it, but I couldn't take the chance!

i don't see this play as being as black and white as y'all here do. the defender is literally milliseconds away from "submarining" an airborne player with his back turned. i find the attack on those who would call a block a little over the top and hard headed...sometimes when a ref who makes a call (or a post here)cannot see the other side, I think we need to be open to others opinions.
I believe I would have called pc foul here, but that does not discount others opinions...thats all they are...they did not make this call.

Unfortunately some here find it hard to take off the whistle, this is not the court...it's a discussion forum right?

IIRC, no one is attacking those who might have called a block in real time. It's a close play, and we miss some, and in the OP, the "best position" was where the camera was, not where either of the officials were.

We're objecting to those who agree with all the relevant facts that go into the call, and then choose to ignore the rule and call the opposite and then try to defend that decision.

No, upon first reaction, he saw and penalize just like any other official in that situation, including myself. BLOCK! The only difference is I admit it.

#1, I'm not ignoring the rule. I'm arguing reality over the rule. I understand it's a PC. In real time, I need instant replay to verify that, which means 9 times out of ten, this call is going to be ruled a BLOCK. The fact that you guys can't take the whislte off and just deal with that reality is a problem.

If you expect that everytime this type of play happens it should be ruled PC. That is unrealistic.

Let's just be real, members are attacked on this forum for having a different opinion from the norm.

To be real, you looked at the replay several times and still insisted that it was a block. You also insisted after viewing the replay that the defender ran under the offensive player; that's patently ridiculous. You insisted that the defender must give the offensive player a step in one of your posts. That's because you simply don't know or understand the basics of the rules being discussed, even though Bob Jenkins laid those basics out in the third post of this thread. And, to top it all off, several times you stated that if you didn't get a good look at the play, you have to make a <b>guess</b> and the <b>guess</b> should be a block.

It's not a matter of having a different opinion; it's a matter of not even having the slightest clue about what is being discussed but still insisting that your stoopid answer is right because of some completely stoopid and irrelevant reasons.

No , the big difference is that you won't admit you're wrong. It may be that some people would have called it a block during the game flow. But it SHOULD have been PC. JR would be willing to admit that, and you won't. Being wrong is one thing, but defending being wrong is entirely different.

There's a difference between "this type of play" and "this play." There's also a difference between what "should be ruled" and "what is ruled."

This play should be ruled PC everytime. (That's the answer to the question in the OP.)

This play will not be ruled PC everytime.

This type of play should not be ruled PC everytime.

Given the agreed upon facts of the OP (defender has both feet on the floor facing an opponent on the floor with the ball), there can be no "opinion" on the correct ruling.

I really haven't partcipated rules wise in this thread, but I want to commend everybody for having done a great job in disecting the rules to show that this play was a charge and how important it is that the rules are applied correctly and that fouls are called using someone's convoluted nonsense.

MTD, Sr.

I've admitted several times that this was a PC foul. Several times. I also admitted that in real time, I need instant replay to see and judge the play correctly. The answer to the OP is PC, no doubt. The answer in real time, might not always be PC. That's the reality, like it or not, that's the reality.

OS:

You are so full of horse manure. You have been advocating against the guarding rules as they are written this entire thread. Your post above just validates the fact that you have no credibility at all. Please go away until you are ready to apologize to everybody on this forum for you idiotic interpretations of the rules.

MTD, Sr.

The call is almost irrelevant.

What I REALLY noticed is that the official in question made about the weakest, meekest, most wishy-washy-looking call to the table I've ever seen. That just screams out "oh my, I just f***ed up, please berate me."

FWIW - charge. Offensive player had a full landing before the crash. He has to "expect to be guarded".

Admitting that you need instant replay to see and judge the play correctly means that you are admitting that you are inadequate as a referee. Are you really saying that? The reality is that most good officials get this call right most of the time. If you are saying you can't get this call right, you're saying you're not a good official. Period.

I can't agree more with the philosophy of a few of the posters on here about teaching about proper positioning to be able to see the same angle, or as close as possible, as we have from the camera.

It has been stated that this is a great reason for the slot (coaches!!!), but lacking that, certainly it is a good reason for the lead to not bail on the play (presumed, but not certain since we can't see his position, but he did come a long way to report).

Great things for newer officials to think about. Knowing the rule is very important to having the knowledge to make the ruling. Positioning yourself to apply the rule however can be just as important. Great video for us all to learn more.

Also, I couldn't help but notice the trail wobbling up the court....funny stuff!