What do you have???

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Brad

Traveling on green post player for sure.

Blocking foul on other end and it is not even close.

Good block -- not goaltending.

Yup, yup, and yup. Sure looked like (can't see the ball, but based on his actions) the green player had clean possession of the ball when he decided to audition for "So You Think You Can Dance." Obviously if not, no travel.

[btaylor64]

I'm going to go back and read everyone's post later, but for now I'm just going to tell you what i have:

It looks like a travel on green in the post, but I said it "looks like" a travel. I can't really see what the ball is doing in the post players hand. He could be fumbling it, so I'm leaving that alone.

Next, on the transition play I have a block, according to my pro standards which is all i've ever learned, but with my new knowledge of a player having to be airborne I guess it would be a charge, either way there absolutely, necessarily has to be a whistle on this play! this is not a play that can be left alone! some ppl might say we can't see how much contact there was from that angle but the offensive player goes down really hard and is hurt so I would deem that sufficient contact.

Lastly, the block by the player in green is legal. He takes it to the board not off the board.

Good *** play. This is one of those plays that I was talking about in another thread where you can go either way with by knowing what you've called throughout the game.

[Mark Padgett]

I absotively, posilutely have a travel on the post player at the beginning and I have a block on the final shot. Then, since the coach would have come out on the floor to dispute my call, I have a technical on him, followed by a second one and an ejection for his continuing to argue. He is then suspended for the rest of the season for attempting to throw a punch (he misses, of course, since my reaction time is outstanding despite the meds) and my cousin Tony S. goes to his house and breaks a few kneecaps.

That's my call.

[mu4scott]

After watching the play several more times I’m even more certain a whistle has to be blown on the block/charge call. I personally think it’s a block, but if it’s 50/50 then I give it to the player in green for his dramatic lunge backward.

I’ve passed on these things before and it seems like chaos usually follows.

[Adam]

I don't agree this is a must whistle play. I can't improve upon what Camron said:

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

It's only a matter of determining fault....and that is no certain task from this video. If the defender was late or moving toward the shooter, that has to be a block. If the defender was there in time, a no call could be warranted give then the defender took himself out of the play more than the contact did.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by btaylor64

This is one of those plays that I was talking about in another thread where you can go either way with by knowing what you've called throughout the game.

Didn't get it then, don't get it now. What does the earlier call have to do with this one, no matter when it happened? This is truly an example of a "call that could go either way" as proven by the split among experienced officials here.
Just see the play and make the call, then live with it. "How did I call this similar play earlier?" has no place in the decision imo.

[rockyroad]

I still say that the best thing to learn from this video is to get your a$$ down the court on transition plays. Do NOT stand there and watch the players run past you and then decide it's time to get going...that official was lazy on that play and there is never an excuse for being lazy!

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Didn't get it then, don't get it now. What does the earlier call have to do with this one, no matter when it happened? This is truly an example of a "call that could go either way" as proven by the split among experienced officials here.
Just see the play and make the call, then live with it. "How did I call this similar play earlier?" has no place in the decision imo.

But that is exactly the point. If you have 2 similar plays that can go either way and you had a "?????" on one end of the court then why wouldn't you have "?????" on this end?

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

But that is exactly the point. If you have 2 similar plays that can go either way and you had a "?????" on one end of the court then why wouldn't you have "?????" on this end?

What if both close plays occur on the same end of the court? Should the officials call both plays the same so that both close decisions go against the same team?

[Mark Padgett]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

What if both close plays occur on the same end of the court? Should the officials call both plays the same so that both close decisions go against the same team?

What a great point! I forgot about that rule requiring an equal number of fouls to be called on each team. Thanks for reminding me.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

What if both close plays occur on the same end of the court? Should the officials call both plays the same so that both close decisions go against the same team?

Simply put, if you've had 3 of these very close plays (99% the same situation, same timing, same contact) and all were called as a block against green and then when the same thing happens at the other end of the court, it better be a block on white.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

But that is exactly the point. If you have 2 similar plays that can go either way and you had a "?????" on one end of the court then why wouldn't you have "?????" on this end?

Because there is no signal for "?????" No two plays are identical. If you
had a similar play earlier and called a block, should you call a block here in the name of consistency? NO Should you call pc to "balance the game?" NO
See the play and call it no matter what the last call was.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by just another ref

...See the play and call it no matter what the last call was.

Well, if you're the Crew Chief and that's how you want it done then that's how we do it.

But I have worked with plenty of officials who are far more successful than I who pre-game "If we have a 50/50 play and we call a block, then if we have a similar 50/50 play later on the other end then we call a block in the name of consistency."

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by btaylor64

I'm going to go back and read everyone's post later, but for now I'm just going to tell you what i have:...

Next, on the transition play I have a block, according to my pro standards which is all i've ever learned, but with my new knowledge of a player having to be airborne I guess it would be a charge, either way there absolutely, necessarily has to be a whistle on this play! this is not a play that can be left alone! some ppl might say we can't see how much contact there was from that angle but the offensive player goes down really hard and is hurt so I would deem that sufficient contact.

Lastly, the block by the player in green is legal. He takes it to the board not off the board.

This is the problem with you working other levels of basketball. You admit that you have only learned a pro philosophy so that is the only way in which you can view plays. Unfortunately, that means that you are getting a number of calls wrong when working at the NCAA or NFHS levels, if you continue to do so. I would ask you to please cease working those levels of play and just focus on the pro games if that is your goal. Those of us who work those games don't need you making incorrect decisions based upon rules and principles from another level of play. It only makes our lives harder and counters all that we do towards educating the fans, coaches, and players at those levels.

I put three specific comments of yours in RED above which are incorrect in either an NCAA or NFHS game.

1. You now know that and openly admit that you judge block/charge by the start of upward movement of the offensive player while the NCAA and NFHS standard is when both feet of the offensive player have left the floor. You say that you would have a block by the favor-the-offense pro-philosophy, but then you actually admit that since you now know the correct criterion for NCAA and NFHS this play could only be considered a charge. So what would you actually call during an NCAA game? If your answer is block for the reason previously stated, then you have no business on a college floor. Unfortunately, the pro game has destroyed the balance between the offense and defense and that makes it far less appealing to watch. Clearly the NBA brass believes that offense sells tickets, but there are many fans that appreciate defense and the pro game consistently over-penalizes and screws the defense.

2. An offensive player tries to jump over and around a defender by flinging his body at an awkward angle and you are going to give him a call because he "goes down really hard and is hurt". Are you serious??? That's an incredibly immature comment. All that it shows is that the official isn't courageous enough to stand the heat of making the proper decision and would rather take the easy way out. Please show me in the rules where injury is the standard by which to judge a foul.

3. For the GT decision whether the ball has struck the board or not means absolutely nothing at the NFHS level and didn't matter for NCAA either until last year. That was a recent change in the college game. Thanks for letting us know your pro view of this play, but please make it clear for other officials reading this forum that you are employing those criteria and not the NFHS rules.

[btaylor64]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

This is the problem with you working other levels of basketball. You admit that you have only learned a pro philosophy so that is the only way in which you can view plays. Unfortunately, that means that you are getting a number of calls wrong when working at the NCAA or NFHS levels, if you continue to do so. I would ask you to please cease working those levels of play and just focus on the pro games if that is your goal. Those of us who work those games don't need you making incorrect decisions based upon rules and principles from another level of play. It only makes our lives harder and counters all that we do towards educating the fans, coaches, and players at those levels.

I put three specific comments of yours in RED above which are incorrect in either an NCAA or NFHS game.

1. You now know that and openly admit that you judge block/charge by the start of upward movement of the offensive player while the NCAA and NFHS standard is when both feet of the offensive player have left the floor. You say that you would have a block by the favor-the-offense pro-philosophy, but then you actually admit that since you now know the correct criterion for NCAA and NFHS this play could only be considered a charge. So what would you actually call during an NCAA game? If your answer is block for the reason previously stated, then you have no business on a college floor. Unfortunately, the pro game has destroyed the balance between the offense and defense and that makes it far less appealing to watch. Clearly the NBA brass believes that offense sells tickets, but there are many fans that appreciate defense and the pro game consistently over-penalizes and screws the defense.

2. An offensive player tries to jump over and around a defender by flinging his body at an awkward angle and you are going to give him a call because he "goes down really hard and is hurt". Are you serious??? That's an incredibly immature comment. All that it shows is that the official isn't courageous enough to stand the heat of making the proper decision and would rather take the easy way out. Please show me in the rules where injury is the standard by which to judge a foul.

3. For the GT decision whether the ball has struck the board or not means absolutely nothing at the NFHS level and didn't matter for NCAA either until last year. That was a recent change in the college game. Thanks for letting us know your pro view of this play, but please make it clear for other officials reading this forum that you are employing those criteria and not the NFHS rules.

1. There is no "favor-the-offense" pro philosophy, they just believe that the onus to be legal is on the defender and if he is not completely legal he must be penalized with a foul. Could you please reference some plays in which the defense is penalized even when the defender is completely legal in which the pros penalize the defender? I just need something to go off of b/c whereas i didn't know about the college rules you don't know about the pro game. Do you know the reasoning behind why the NCAA wants either blocks or charges on close plays called or do they say? We are taught the history and reasonings behind the rules so that we better understand the concept. Our concept is that we have an RA cause the league has the belief that you are not playing legitimate defense if you are standing underneath the basket. if a block/charge play is too freaking close to call (which for guys at that level is rare) it is a block. The reasoning: we want players to keep attacking the basket and not be afraid so that the game ends up turning into a pull up jump shot fest. If i was given a legitimate reason why a league or a conference wants something a certain way, ok I'm fine with that but just to tell me to do it a certain way with no explanation, especially when my gut tells me its wrong, I have a problem with that. You're right I am still calling this a block. I am not going to reference the, "you shouldn't be on a college floor then" remark. I've worked my butt off to be there. I attempt to do what my CC says for the night and go on about my business. If he tells me I missed a play and gives me the reason why, I attempt to correct it if I have the play again.

2. I never said if a player slung himself into an opponent I would give him a foul if he went down and was hurt. I stated that there was sufficient enough contact to warrant a whistle and also the fact that he goes down hurt even more makes me have a foul on the play. Onus is on the defender to be legal! if he is not legal the only way i can absolve him from having a foul is if the offensive player does something overt such as lead with a knee or foot, in this case he doesn't do either. Yes the play in question has minimal contact, or at least so it seems, but it is enough that it takes the offensive players hips and legs out from underneath him causing him to not be able to return the floor in a normal position. We cannot choose to ignore illegal contact. Players have to decide outcomes of games through LEGAL actions, not illegal ones which we choose to ignore. if 2 players are on the floor on a drive to the basket 9/10 times someone has committed an illegal act and on that 1/10 times then you have 2 floppers on your hands and you better watch both of them the rest of the night.

3. Ok to make it clear for everyone on the forum I no longer referee NFHS. So my claim on this play is germaine to both leagues.

Also, just to note: If an offensive player was expecting contact and got none, while in the air, and he still wants to fall to the floor to simulate that something happened or he got fouled, he way more often than not is landing with a foot first to soften the blow and in this case he does not as he has no control once he got hip checked.