Classic charge?

[wanja]

The block call against Georgia Tech at the end of the Georgia Tech/North Carolina State game seemed like a case book charge to me. The defender established and maintained legal guarding position while moving back and slightly to his left. The defender initiated contact to the defender's torso and from my view ran him over.

If all the elements of a charge are there, its gotta be a charge. Anybody got a different look or clarification?

[atcref]

saw the same thing you did, and wondered what else the defender could do. Established position and took one right in the torso. I thought I was the only one when the commentators believed that it was a block with no continuation.

[ranjo]

I also saw what I thought was a charge, but when they showed it again at another angle, It looked as if the defender may have slid in at the last second. Not having the electronic gizmos that let you replay it over and over, I will say the official either got it right or has gotten a call from his supervisor to discuss it.

At this level, along with great authority and great compensation, goes great accountability.

[Coltdoggs]

He was moving...he didn't have his feet set....

Sin,
Coach

[wanja]

Originally Posted by Coltdoggs

He was moving...he didn't have his feet set....

Sin,
Coach

This is definitely a classic coach/fan misconception. There is NO requirement for a defender to have his/her feet set in order for a charge (player control foul) to occur.

[Back In The Saddle]

Originally Posted by wanja

This is definitely a classic coach/fan misconception. There is NO requirement for a defender to have his/her feet set in order for a charge (player control foul) to occur.

Mostly that's true. In order to establish LGP the defender must have his feet "set" at some point, for a brief amount of time. But mostly yes, you're right.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Back In The Saddle

Mostly that's true. In order to establish LGP the defender must have his feet "set" at some point, for a brief amount of time. But mostly yes, you're right.

That is not true. You must have two feet on the floor and facing your opponent, there is nothing about being feet being set.

Peace

[Red_Killian]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

That is not true. You must have two feet on the floor and facing your opponent, there is nothing about being feet being set.

Peace

Didn't you just state the definition of set as it is commonly used? Getting set is establishing LGP with 2 feet on the floor, facing opponent. After obtaining LGP the "set" requirement is no longer required. I understand we should use the term LGP but most coaches still understand set better than LGP.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Red_Killian

Didn't you just state the definition of set as it is commonly used? Getting set is establishing LGP with 2 feet on the floor, facing opponent. After obtaining LGP the "set" requirement is no longer required. I understand we should use the term LGP but most coaches still understand set better than LGP.

Red,

Go back and read what I was responding to. BITS was talking about "establishing LGP." Establishing and maintaining are two different things.

And yes, I use LGP when talking to coaches. If they do not understand what that means, that is there problem.

Peace

[wanja]

I second JR's point that the only requirements for establishing legal guarding position per rule 4-23-2 are
a The guard must have both feet touching the playing court.
b. The front of the guards's torso must be facing the opponent.

Again, there is NO requirement for the feet to be set in order for a player control foul to occur. For the coach's benefit consider these examples.

a. defender at top of key with lgp and steps straight back towards foul line. While defender is moving dribbler impacts defender in chest with dribblers shoulder. -- player control foul

b. defender is stationary with legal guarding position (lgp) as dribbler rapidly approaches, at last second, before severe impact, defender turns slightly (and shuffles feet) in order to protect self -- player control foul

c. defender is moving along with dribbler toward dribbler's basket when dribbler sharply changes direction and impacts defender in torso - player control foul

[wanja]

Originally Posted by Red_Killian

Didn't you just state the definition of set as it is commonly used? Getting set is establishing LGP with 2 feet on the floor, facing opponent. After obtaining LGP the "set" requirement is no longer required. I understand we should use the term LGP but most coaches still understand set better than LGP.

We are starting to lose the point here. Granted, if both feet are touching the floor, they are set for at least an instance. The point really is can a defender be moving (not have feet set) and still draw a player control foul. The answer is absolutely yes. I cry uncle on the very minor side issue.

[SamIAm]

As I understand this, we are saying you can't have LGP unless you are/were set in front of the offensive player. Is that correct?
Ex. Fast player catches slower player from behind on fast break. Fast player gets in front of slower player, but can't establish LGP, yet is in the same position as other sitchs where LGP was established, ie. drive from the half-court offense.

This doesn't pass my smell test, but in reading the NCAA Def. of LGP, it is correct.

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by SamIAm

As I understand this, we are saying you can't have LGP unless you are/were set in front of the offensive player. Is that correct? Please define set.

The only thing that HAS to occur with the feet is that at some point, both feet have to be touching the ground and the defender must be facing the player he is guarding. At that point, LGP is established, and the defender may move/jump/run/stand on one foot and LGP is maintained until the offensive player gets his head/shoulders past the defender or the defender stops guarding the ball handler.

There is also no minimum distance for LGP to be established, so the defender could be standing at the FT line w/ the ball handler at half court and LGP could be established.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by SamIAm

As I understand this, we are saying you can't have LGP unless you are/were set in front of the offensive player. Is that correct? Please define set.

There is only one person that said that and that person was completely wrong. The rule was quoted above as well.

The feet have to be on the floor and facing a ball handler. It does not say the feet have to be set at any time.

Peace

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by wanja

We are starting to lose the point here. Granted, if both feet are touching the floor, they are set for at least an instance. The point really is can a defender be moving (not have feet set) and still draw a player control foul. The answer is absolutely yes. I cry uncle on the very minor side issue.

"Set", as is most commonly used, is when the feet are on the ground and are staying on the ground....not in momentary contact...which is all the the rule requires.