So another one of those block/charge calls

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by lrpalmer3

IMO, the offensive player never gained control of the ball, which means that you need to allow him space to avoid the contact. The offensive player never saw the defender because his head was still turned around.

Not an easy call to make in real time, but I've got a block.

This is my opinion too.

Even if he did have possession, I'd still have a block. Defender was still moving forward at the point of contact.

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

This is my opinion too.

Even if he did have possession, I'd still have a block. Defender was still moving forward at the point of contact.

Do you disagree that while the contact is imminent, A1 has his hand on top of the ball and is pushing it down to the ground? If so, state why.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to convince anyone that A1 had possession - I want to learn why my interp of possession seems to be in the minority.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by JugglingReferee

Do you disagree that while the contact is imminent, A1 has his hand on top of the ball and is pushing it down to the ground? If so, state why.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to convince anyone that A1 had possession - I want to learn why my interp of possession seems to be in the minority.

Where his hand is has nothing to do with control as it relates to this situation. The player was receiving a pass that was not at all controlled. If after the ball hitting his hand, then the floor I would allow this player to grab the ball with both hands (one if he could do it) and dribble. A dribble is a conscious act. This player was just trying to gather in the pass and he did not do that.

Peace

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Where his hand is has nothing to do with control as it relates to this situation. The player was receiving a pass that was not at all controlled. If after the ball hitting his hand, then the floor I would allow this player to grab the ball with both hands (one if he could do it) and dribble. A dribble is a conscious act. This player was just trying to gather in the pass and he did not do that.

Peace

So then we just have a difference of opinion. That's fair. I'm comfortable with ruling the hand-to-ball contact is the start of a legal dribble.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by JugglingReferee

Do you disagree that while the contact is imminent, A1 has his hand on top of the ball and is pushing it down to the ground? If so, state why.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to convince anyone that A1 had possession - I want to learn why my interp of possession seems to be in the minority.

I didn't see "control". It was VERY close. I sometimes conclude as you do that the hand on top the ball pushing it down is the start of a dribble...but not always....just depends on how much "control" I think the player has. It's a pretty fine line.

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

I didn't see "control". It was VERY close. I sometimes conclude as you do that the hand on top the ball pushing it down is the start of a dribble...but not always....just depends on how much "control" I think the player has. It's a pretty fine line.

Back when I was in college, I was asked to be the shot clock operator for the basketball games.

They use 3-man and there was a sitch where B1 reached in, put his hand on the ball, and pushed it to the ground. A1 and B1's backs were to the C who was moving up closer to the division line to see the play better. I reset the clock (and I was smart enough to first look at the display before resetting it). I then reset it again once A1 regained possession. (The whole play was about 15-18 feet from me.)

It was the type of play where B1 was able to get a quick handle on it, but wouldn't have been able to keep it because he was off balance.

Seeing that A1 was closely guarded near the division line, and not theatening the goal, the T (crew chief, now D1 official) blew his whistle and came over to me. He wanted to know why I reset the clock. He knew I am an official and I explained to him what happened, including the value of the pre-reset clock.

He agreed with me that the clock should have been reset (twice in this case). It all happened very quickly and the sitch re-enforced (sp?) to me that the act of pushing the ball to the ground must mean possession.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

I am joining the thread late, but I have watched this play in real time at least twenty times (everytime in real time, not slow motion), and I would call this a charge. I first time I watched this video I did not make a decision because I wanted to see where the foul was so that I could then attempt the watch the place is if I were officiating the game.

Now before I go any further, I will admit that this play is the classic example of a bang-bang play. I do not think that I could critize an official for calling this a block.

I think this was a charge whether B32 had control of the ball or did not have control of the ball at the time of contact. I agree that when obtaining a legal guarding position against a player who does not have control of the ball, that time and distance is a factor. But remember the speed of the offensive player determines the time and distance that the defender must give. It was my judgement that B32 was not moving at the moment that W11 obtained a legal guarding position, therefore, W11 could be as close to B32 as possible short of contact when he obtained a legal guarding position against B32.

Once again, this is a judgement call and it was a very very close play.

MTD, Sr.

[Nevadaref]

Well stated, MTD, and similar to what I wrote back in post #3.

[IREFU2]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

Yes guys, I found another one of these.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=NR_pexM1GdU

I want to say that the call was called correctly with the block, but of course there's probably something I'm missing that's obvioius. So what do you guys think, and could you explain your thought process behind your call?

On another note, I'd like to thank everyone for the helpful responses in the previous thread. You don't know how helpful this will be for me in the fall.

If you look at the video and see where the contact occurs, it is clearly a block. Another thing to look at is the legs of the defender, they are outside of shoulder width. Just my 2 cents.

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by IREFU2

If you look at the video and see where the contact occurs, it is clearly a block.

We did. Some of disagree.

Originally Posted by IREFU2

Another thing to look at is the legs of the defender, they are outside of shoulder width. Just my 2 cents.

And....?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by IREFU2

Another thing to look at is the legs of the defender, they are outside of shoulder width.

What difference would that make when the contact wasn't on the defender's legs?

[IREFU2]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

What difference would that make when the contact wasn't on the defender's legs?

I was looking at his position and it "looked" like his legs were bowed out. But, pure judgement on my behalf. So lets just take it for what is worth.....peace.

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by IREFU2

I was looking at his position and it "looked" like his legs were bowed out. But, pure judgement on my behalf. So lets just take it for what is worth.....peace.

Do you know why it don't matter where the legs were if the contact is on the torso?

[IREFU2]

Originally Posted by JugglingReferee

Do you know why it don't matter where the legs were if the contact is on the torso?

Of course, I am not a first year official.