Which is exactly why I agree...based on 2 seconds of crappy video and bad angle....the correct call was made.

By the free throw line extended B1 was far enough ahead that A1 was anticipating a train wreck, which is why he fell so awkwardly when B1 flopped.

Camron, human beings aren't billiard balls. If the defender was drifting to his left, and the shooter drifting to his right (not really disputed here), the defender would have fallen in roughly the same direction as the shooter due to his own momentum.

Seriously, when's the last time you saw two roughly equally sized opponents hit each other and react like an eight-ball off the queue?

On the court, yes; on grainy video, not necessarily.

Let me say this. If the defender was leaning to the side when contact was made; easy block. From the video, it's possible. I don't trust the camera, on this, though. To assume the player's position in relation to the fixed point means he moved assumes the camera didn't move. Even a change in the angle of the shot would move the fixed point in relation to the player. This video is inconclusive, IMO.

You're forgetting the flop here. Billiard balls can't flop, this player did.

I still fall back on my earlier stance. If we have to break this down frame-by-frame, even if we all agreed on the correct call, the other call is completely understandable in real time on the run.

Sometimes players lean when they jump expecting the defender to come underneath them and if the defender bails out the offensive players ends up crashing to the floor. I had this scenario last season. Player drove, jumped, leaned, and at the last possible second, before contact was made, the defender simply backed up and the offensive player came crashing to the floor. It was a 3-man crew and me (Lead) and my partner (Trail) saw the exact same thing. The coach who was 70 feet away kept insisting there had to be a foul, that his player would not just fall to the floor on his own.

In that instance I totally agree. However, that is not the case on this play.

<a href="http://s156.photobucket.com/albums/t36/mu4scott1973/?action=view&current=ref1r.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://i156.photobucket.com/albums/t36/mu4scott1973/ref1r.jpg" border="0" alt="Photobucket"></a>

Yeah, but you asked the question whether or not a player could fall on his own in support of your viewpoint on this play. The answer is obviously yes. So you shouldn't use that argument as a supporting factor.

Are you saying that A1 is already almost parallel to the floor because of contact with B1??? A1 is already almost parallel at the instant of contact here.

Usually on a hard fall to the floor with a legitimate B1 block, A1 would still be mostly upright.

I agree with Jeff on this one......A1 tried to "flop a block" just as much as B1 tried to "flop a charge"

I am praying for this thread to die....

PLEASE! :eek: Enough already!

You could always, um, quit reading it. :)

Ya ya I know. But then I might miss something good. I'm home watching the Olympics, so I have the day to myself... may as well surf the net while watching.

Ouch. :(

Shutup. :p

I think I hate whoever the official is in that film because he caused this 13 page-long mess!

Given the relative distances involved, the camera would have moved several feet between frames in order to give a impression of movement of a small amount....the camera man would need to be at a full sprint in the bleachers running towards the backcourt while holding a camera over his shoulder to move that much in 1/30 of a second. Additionally, other elements between the frames can be used to establish how stationary the camera was.
Agree. I've always agreed there was a flop.

The other call being a charge, I can agree. The other call being a no-call because the defender flopped out of what would have been a charge, I can agree. The other call being a no-call because it was so close and hard to tell...that i can't agree on. And that is my main issue..some of the "no-calls" seem to be based on the closeness of the play....and that is not acceptable. I would simply have no issue with either call as long as a call was made on this one.

We're in 99% agreement, then.

To me, it's close between a no-call (due to the flop) and a block. One call is right, the other is wrong; but both are understandable.

I haven't seen anyone say it's too close to call so just let it go. Maybe I missed it.