NBA Charge Foul rules

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

Running? What are you, crazy? They could collide with another player or trip and fall. Get running out of the sport.

Not only get rid of running and jumping, get rid of the ball. That should stop a lot of the problems.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Not only get rid of running and jumping, get rid of the ball. That should stop a lot of the problems.

Maybe we could play it like a board game. You get a bunch of players on each side of the board, some taller than others, some quicker than others, and some more versatile than others.

Not sure what to call it, though.

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Maybe we could play it like a board game. You get a bunch of players on each side of the board, some taller than others, some quicker than others, and some more versatile than others.

Not sure what to call it, though.

Chess?

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by btaylor64

Are you wanting everybody on here to disagree with you and hate you?

Yes. It's how he gets his entertainment. He is not an official and knows nothing about officiating. He comes here only to post inane and/or insulting comments and then laugh when people get all worked up about it.

I am in PR and let me tell you that this is not how you persuade an audience.

But he's not trying to persuade anyone. He's simply an idiot who gets his jollies by stirring up trouble. Guess how many people are on my ignore list. One. Care to guess who it is?

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

Guess how many people are on my ignore list. One. Care to guess who it is?

Me?

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

But he's not trying to persuade anyone. He's simply an idiot who gets his jollies by stirring up trouble. Guess how many people are on my ignore list. One. Care to guess who it is?

Woddy?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

Chess?

I never would have thought of that.

[Old School]

Originally Posted by btaylor64

ORANGE- Everybody has let you keep on and keep on giving your opinion, which you have the God given right to do, without totally, blatantly, brutally humiliating you like they do in previous threads and yet in 2 successive posts you refer to a person or persons as stupid and lacking comprehension. Are you wanting everybody on here to disagree with you and hate you? I am in PR and let me tell you that this is not how you persuade an audience.

Have you heard the song it's too late to turn back now....well, it's too late, damage has been done. Just ask Michael Vick, or Pres. Bush. Now, you want me to believe all of a sudden you like me. That's funny

GREEN- If you call every bit of contact to the torso an offensive foul, then you will have at least a good amount of plays that will be incorrect. I always hate hearing the "torso" explanation on block/charge play. It is good in a broad, general way, but there is so much more to it than that, imo.

First of all, not every bit of contact to the torso if a foul, only when a player spots up LGP is contact to the torso crucial. You shouldn't hate it, it's a very good barometer.

I personally believe we give 2 steps to players already on block/charge plays. We give them 1 when they gather the ball (pivot) and 2 when they step off the pivot foot onto the other (the one they jump off of). The gather starts the continuing motion meaning the defender has to be there when the offensive player gathers, easily giving the offensive player the ability to switch and/or change direction. How is that not good enough?

This is something new, I have not heard this analogy before. If I was to use this analogy, then the play in the video is a block because the defender was not there when the player gathered the ball.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by btaylor64

I personally believe we give 2 steps to players already on block/charge plays. We give them 1 when they gather the ball (pivot) and 2 when they step off the pivot foot onto the other (the one they jump off of). The gather starts the continuing motion meaning the defender has to be there when the offensive player gathers, easily giving the offensive player the ability to switch and/or change direction. How is that not good enough?

Your personal belief is completely wrong under both NCAA and NFHS rules. If anyone is giving 2 steps in these situations, then they are calling block/charges incorrectly. There is no time/distance allowed when guarding a player with the ball, either dribbling or holding. The only criteria used to make the correct call is whether the defender has a legal guarding position at the time of contact, where on the defender the contact occurs, and whether the dribbler was able to get his head/shoulders past the defender before contact. Whether they gather the ball or not or how many steps the player with the ball takes before the contact occurs is completely irrelevant, rules-wise.

The criteria that you are using applies to guarding a player without the ball.

[btaylor64]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Your personal belief is completely wrong under both NCAA and NFHS rules. If anyone is giving 2 steps in these situations, then they are calling block/charges incorrectly. There is no time/distance allowed when guarding a player with the ball, either dribbling or holding. The only criteria used to make the correct call is whether the defender has a legal guarding position at the time of contact, where on the defender the contact occurs, and whether the dribbler was able to get his head/shoulders past the defender before contact. Whether they gather the ball or not or how many steps the player with the ball takes before the contact occurs is completely irrelevant, rules-wise.

The criteria that you are using applies to guarding a player without the ball.

You're exactly right in terms of primary defenders, but I was under the assumption that we were all talking about secondary defenders and them coming in and undercutting the shooter?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by btaylor64

You're exactly right in terms of primary defenders, but I was under the assumption that we were all talking about secondary defenders and them coming in and undercutting the shooter?

The same rules apply to secondary defenders also under NFHS and NCAA rules. And undercutting the shooter is a separate matter...and call. In that situation, a defender has to establish and maintain a legal guarding position before the player with ball becomes airborne.

Of course, if you're discussing strictly NBA rules, ignore everything that I've posted. I simply do not have sufficient knowledge of that ruleset to comment one way or another.

[Adam]

It seems to me one cannot have LGP and undercut a shooter.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

It seems to me one cannot have LGP and undercut a shooter.

Um, yeah......

[Old School]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

It seems to me one cannot have LGP and undercut a shooter.

If you remove time and distance and stipulate before the shooter goes airborne. It is possible.

Why is it in Fed. that more allowance in terms of LGP is given to the player without the ball and on defense then the player with the ball about to score? 4-40-6

[Adam]

Removed and edited: I said I was done. I'll keep my word.