Block/Charge explanation. - Page 2

Bart Tyson · #16 (**permalink**) Tue Feb 26, 2002, 04:03pm

Why would you stop the game with a PC when both def. are still standing? This could stop a fast break going the other way.

bob jenkins · #17 (**permalink**) Tue Feb 26, 2002, 04:29pm

[QUOTE]Originally posted by RecRef

Quote:

Originally posted by bob jenkins

Quote:

Originally posted by RecRef

Stop.

Quote:

Just last night I made 2 charge calls that you would have let go if you stick to the no call on a shoulder hit. In game one B was in a 2-3 zone with B1 and B2 guarding with less than 2 feet between them, not to say anything about 3 feet. A1 tried to split them and hit both on the shoulders.

So far, I have no call. What happened next?

A1 went down with both B1 and B2 still standing and looking down at him.

Then how did A disadvantage B?

I'd have a no call.

RecRef · #18 (**permalink**) Tue Feb 26, 2002, 04:40pm

Quote:

Originally posted by Bart Tyson
Why would you stop the game with a PC when both def. are still standing? This could stop a fast break going the other way.

Because A1 by trying to split the defenders violated Rule 10-6-2 and Case Book 10.6.2C.

We are not talking about incidental contact.

The what if fast break has nothing to do with the play as A2 could have picked up the ball an shot a goal just as easily as a B fast break.

Plus, I am getting a little tired of the dribbler trying to take on the defender with what is clearly a charge/moving into situation just like they see the big guys in the NBA do. This because they think that they will not be called on it or the defense will get a block called on them.

RecRef · #19 (**permalink**) Tue Feb 26, 2002, 04:42pm

Quote:

Originally posted by bob jenkins
Then how did A disadvantage B?

I'd have a no call. [/B]

Then you have no call.

I do because A tried to take the advantage of the blocking defense away from B by trying to go through them.

Kelvin green · #20 (**permalink**) Tue Feb 26, 2002, 04:51pm

OZ... legal moving screen

the one I am the most familiar is that A1 is going to basket on fastbreak A2 is following and A2 slows down (without changing path) and causes a traffic jam so that A1 has a free layup.

egausch

There is nothing in the rule book about initiating contact. I would throw that out of my mind. You hear the "initiated contact" stuff on TV all the time. It does not matter who initiated the contact. Who was legal and who was not? who was vertical and who was not? Who broke verticality and who did not?

To have a foul you must have contact that impedes, hinedrs etc.
If the defense meets legal guarding rules and the offense hinders,pushes, etc then the offense has committed the foul.

If the offense fakes, and the defense jumps up and then the offense goes into him why is that difficult. In this situation as described it's an easy PC call.

Defense had legal guarding poistion. If he jumps straight up then he is in his verticality and foul is on offense.

If defense gets around a player and establishes legal guarding position then the foul is on the offense. If the defense does not establish legal guarding position then the contact is on the defense.

This is why your hear from referees about officiating the defence (spelled it that way out of defernce for the Aussies who won two gold medals here in Salt Lake). If you ref the defense you will know who was not legal and who was not. In fact sometimes when you are watching highlevel NCAA or NBA ame that there are some what appear to be obvious travels missed, is because they are reffing the defense. I think PC calls are the easiest ones to call when you ref the defense.

BTW who is reposnsible for the train wreck? I dont think that in US statutory or common law there is an allowance for someone to drive in front of a moving train, so I am not sure that is a good analogy. (Depending on what the engineer is doing there may be contributory neglience...)