|
Quote:
A.R. 172. A1 drives to the basket and: (1) The referee calls a player-control foul and an umpire calls a block; or (2) The referee calls a charge and an umpire calls a block. RULING: This is uncharacteristic of a double personal foul where one official adjudicates the obviously committed fouls against two opponents. (Men) In (1) and (2), the two officials disagree that the fouls occurred simultaneously. In (1), the ball shall be awarded to Team A, the team in control, at the point of interruption with no reset of the shot clock. (Rule 2-11.7.f, 7-4.1.d and 7-5.8) In (2), the two officials disagree as to whether there was a charge or a block, however, the ball was released by A1. Although there is no team control while a ball is in flight, when the goal is successful, play shall resume at the point of interruption by awarding the ball to Team B, the team not credited with the score, at the end line with the privilege to run the end line. When the try is not successful, play shall resume at the point of interruption with the use of the alternating possession arrow and a reset of the shot clock. (Rule 7-5.9) (Women) In (1) and (2), when the officials signal simultaneously, they shall get together and agree to give the call to the official who had the play originate in his/her primary. When the officials disagree that the fouls occurred simultaneously, they shall determine which foul occurred first. Once a decision is reached, that foul is reported to the official scorer and the appropriate penalty is assessed. (Rule 4-9, 4-10, 4-29 and 4-35.1) |
Quote:
Perhaps if the C made the right call and Burr the wrong call rather than vice versa, I'd feel more strongly about it. |
Quote:
Quote:
"The officials disagree." Obviously, this is the case originally, but if the officials can confer and one can convince the other of the proper call, there would no longer be a disagreement, and no need for the double foul call. Also, I think it is significant that the word signal does not appear in either play. |
B-l-o-c-k
Quote:
Also Burr's call, as it was a secondary defender. Agree that C was in poor position - he likely did not have a good look at how late the defender was. |
Quote:
Peace |
Quote:
2. The reason that I wrote that the wording was fuzzy is because I believe that this instance of "disagree" is an error and should read "agree" instead: "(Men) In (1) and (2), the two officials disagree that the fouls occurred simultaneously." 3. How this play was handled by Jim Burr, who is one of the best in the business and has been for some time, should serve as conclusive proof to you of how it is to be done at the NCAAM and NFHS levels. I included the NCAAW ruling from the AR as well, so that you would know that what you espouse is actually the NCAAW ruling and definitely different. |
Quote:
2. It was indeed a secondary defender, but this defender comes from outside of the lane and is moving towards the middle of the court. That's clearly the C's primary coverage area. The Lead should not be watching this defender. This is the opposite of what we normally see when the secondary defender is coming from the middle or weakside, out of the Lead's PCA, and trying to help with a drive on the C's side. So this was still the C's call, even though the crash involved a secondary defender. 3. The C does seem to get too high and possibly straight-lined as he ends up looking at the dribbler's back. It is difficult to see the defender move to his right AFTER the offensive player goes airborne from that angle. That is probably why the C deemed this a PC foul. Angles are of critical importance. |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Also, if the other guy sees your signal, says "My bad," and walks away, what would you do then? |
It was definitely a block but it was clearly in the C's primary.
|
Quote:
It would be of no consequence if the guy had established LGP prior to the contact, but to my eye this guy has not. |
Quote:
Only one signal is given, then it is okay for only one type of foul to be reported. If two signals are given, then two fouls must be reported and the result is a double foul. Neither official is permitted to simply drop his signal and walk away. If an official did that, then a coach would definitely have a right to get upset. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
You don't believe that the defender ever had two feet on the floor and his torso facing the opponent at any time prior to the contact? You may want to check the video again because I have to strongly disagree. |
First of all it is a block. Player doesn't beat the alighted offensive player to the spot. This is where i don't like "takes it in the torso" philosophy. It is a decent, middle of the road philosophy if you ask me. There are way too many instances where a guy takes it in the torso and it should NOT be a charge.
Secondly, is most everybody saying that it would be a charge had he just tried to dribble past the defender instead of jump stop past him? |
This is good stuff.
Was there a block/charge player earlier in the game? If there was, perhaps one of the officials was trying to call a similar foul on a play with similar consequence on that side of the court. |
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:18am. |