NBA blarge

[JugglingReferee]

Anyone find a YouTube link?

[All_Heart]

Originally Posted by JugglingReferee

Anyone find a YouTube link?

You can see it on ESPN - link

[Scrapper1]

Definitely was a block, but by rule, they administered it incorrectly.

[btaylor64]

great call by Mike Callahan. Defenders Right heel was in the restricted area. This is not a blarge. If an official is ruling on a play just on the basis that a block/charge is involving the restricted area and the restricted area alone the other officials may come to the official who made the call and give extra information. For example, if Lead has an offensive foul and it WAS an RA play, and the slot sees that his heel was raised but over the RA line then he may come to the lead and say, "John, I have white #42 with his heels raised in the RA, it should be a block." There is rarely, if ever, any debate. The Lead changes the call and awards the free throws.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by btaylor64

If an official is ruling on a play just on the basis that a block/charge is involving the restricted area and the restricted area alone the other officials may come to the official who made the call and give extra information.

You know what? That's right. I forgot about that. I think there's a ruling about a difference of opinion NOT involving the Restricted Area. I had forgotten about that. Excellent point.

[btaylor64]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

You know what? That's right. I forgot about that. I think there's a ruling about a difference of opinion NOT involving the Restricted Area. I had forgotten about that. Excellent point.

Yeah in block/charge plays that don't involve the RA it is a double foul and resume from the POI.

Jurassic,

There is help defense. All our RA plays involve secondary defenders. Primary defenders don't have to be outside the RA to take a charge. We just don't want guys running in there and undercuting guys like they do in college. Its a safety thing and an opening up the lane thing like you said. What's wrong with opening up the lane for more scoring? What would you rather watch and referee, a game in the 50s or in the 90s?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by btaylor64

1) All our RA plays involve secondary defenders. Primary defenders don't have to be outside the RA to take a charge. We just don't want guys running in there and undercuting guys like they do in college.

2) What would you rather watch and referee, a game in the 50s or in the 90s?

1) Our? We? Did you skip high school ball before you got a chance to do a varsity game and move straight into the NBA? If so, congratulations.

2) I'd rather watch any game at any level from any time period than the current doo-doo that they're playing (supposedly) in to-day's NBA. The NBA is unwatchable imo.

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by btaylor64

great call by Mike Callahan. Defenders Right heel was in the restricted area. This is not a blarge. If an official is ruling on a play just on the basis that a block/charge is involving the restricted area and the restricted area alone the other officials may come to the official who made the call and give extra information. For example, if Lead has an offensive foul and it WAS an RA play, and the slot sees that his heel was raised but over the RA line then he may come to the lead and say, "John, I have white #42 with his heels raised in the RA, it should be a block." There is rarely, if ever, any debate. The Lead changes the call and awards the free throws.

Completely agree.

The same should happen in our Fed games if a player taking a charge was standing on the OOB line and two conflicting signals happen. If one officials shares with the other that B was OOB, then by rule you have a block. Now, if the PC official's judgment remains that B was IB, then I think you have to go with the DF.

That NBA crew looked great getting the call correct.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by JugglingReferee

Completely agree.

Originally Posted by JugglingReferee

The same should happen in our Fed games if a player taking a charge was standing on the OOB line and two conflicting signals happen. If one officials shares with the other that B was OOB, then by rule you have a block. Now, if the PC official's judgment remains that B was IB, then I think you have to go with the DF.

This is an old topic that I hesitate to raise...but....not necessarily. B1 only gives up LGP by being OOB. They don't get automatically pegged with a foul. If they were moving, jumping, etc., they get the foul. If they were there in a manner where LGP was not a factor, they don't necessarily get the foul. The rule ONLY says that a player can't have LGP while OOB...nothing more.

All the case plays addressing the issue make one important implication...that the defender was acvtively guarding the opponent. And by actively guarding, I mean moving in an attempt to maintain position but stepping OOB in the process. The defender gets the foul because the were OOB since the actions they were engaged in required LGP to be legal.

Much like a player stationary in the lane with their back to a dribble/drive who doesn't have LGP, the player who is OOB can still be fouled in the right circumstances; the offensive player can commit a foul that is not a charge, but a push, hold, illegal use of hands, etc. None of those are impacted by LGP and, as a result, have no dependancy on being inbounds or OOB.