Legal Guarding Position

[rockyroad]

Don't know if there has already been a thread on this or not (and too lazy to search), but I was just reading thru the NCAA Rules Changes, and see that NCAA-W has revoked the ruling that a defender under the basket did not have legal guarding position - in order to make LGP the same for any player anywhere on the court...hmmm - wonder why they had the big change of mind on that one?

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

Don't know if there has already been a thread on this or not (and too lazy to search), but I was just reading thru the NCAA Rules Changes, and see that NCAA-W has revoked the ruling that a defender under the basket did not have legal guarding position - in order to make LGP the same for any player anywhere on the court...hmmm - wonder why they had the big change of mind on that one?

I think it was because it was being called inconsistantly. How far is "under the basket" without lines? When did a north-south drive become an east-west drive, in which case the defender could have LGP under the basket? It was a good idea, and I understood the theory, but in practice it was hard to administer. Now we don't have to add in the additional conditions about exactly where the defender is standing and where the drive originated.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

I think it was because it was being called inconsistantly.

Naw, it was because it was dumb and illogical right from the git-go. Only a stoopid monkey or the NBA would try to impose different rules on how to call the exact same play dependent on where that play occurred on the court.

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Naw, it was because it was dumb and illogical right from the git-go. Only a stoopid monkey or the NBA would try to impose different rules on how to call the exact same play dependent on where that play occurred on the court.

Well, there's that, too.

Actually, the theory was that a player guarding a drive down the lane for a layup, who was directly under the basket, was only at that spot to draw a charge; they would not be in a position to block the shot or play any other type of defense. However, on a drive along the baseline, the offensive player could shoot or pass, and therefore the defender standing in the exact same spot has more defensive options for being in that spot.

Now, I already hear you typing your responses, and I'll tell you right up front I agree with your points already. But, as you've also stated, (many times), it's our job to call the rules as written, and not to call the game how we think it should be called. Right?

(Btw, I know it was being called inconsistantly because I was calling it inconsistantly...)

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

But, as you've also stated, (many times), it's our job to call the rules as written, and not to call the game how we think it should be called. Right?

Well, there's that too.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

NCAA-W has revoked the ruling that a defender under the basket did not have legal guarding position - in order to make LGP the same for any player anywhere on the court...

I think that it will also be emphasized to the men this year that block/charge will be called per rule, without regard to position on the court.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

Don't know if there has already been a thread on this or not (and too lazy to search), but I was just reading thru the NCAA Rules Changes, and see that NCAA-W has revoked the ruling that a defender under the basket did not have legal guarding position - in order to make LGP the same for any player anywhere on the court...hmmm - wonder why they had the big change of mind on that one?

There definitely was a previous thread on this change. I'm sure because that is how I learned of it. For some strange reason I can't locate that thread with the search function. Perhaps someone else can find it and post a link.

[Old School]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

There definitely was a previous thread on this change. I'm sure because that is how I learned of it. For some strange reason I can't locate that thread with the search function. Perhaps someone else can find it and post a link.

I mentioned it in the NBA block charge thread, up until then I had not heard it mention.

As I mention before, I am disappointed and I think it is a step in the wrong direction. But with the turmoil in the NBA officiating community, I can see the women's committee pasting on this part. Not to mention that their game is not as physical as the men, especially at the Pro level where it was necessary to implement a restrictive area.

I can also see how this could be called inconsistently too. I was hoping the men's would incorporate this into their language and begin to move away from this unwritten rule.

[Old School]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

Actually, the theory was that a player guarding a drive down the lane for a layup, who was directly under the basket, was only at that spot to draw a charge; they would not be in a position to block the shot or play any other type of defense. However, on a drive along the baseline, the offensive player could shoot or pass, and therefore the defender standing in the exact same spot has more defensive options for being in that spot.

Thank you for providing this explanation. I oftened wondered why it was acceptable to stand under the basket if the drive was from the baseline. Good stuff....!

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Old School

I mentioned it in the NBA block charge thread, up until then I had not heard it mention.

No, this was a few months ago, and Jurassic had some comments on the change.