Blarge alert!!!

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by btaylor64

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.

Great, time for our dose of pro philosophy.

Let me make it short and quick for everyone: FAVOR THE OFFENSE.

Originally Posted by btaylor64

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?

Not only are people here saying that, but that's what the NFHS and NCAA rules books both say.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Seriously?

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.

Defender was leaning several degrees backward as he slid into the guys path.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Defender was leaning several degrees backward as he slid into the guys path.

What if he were leaning several degrees forward?

I must be missing your point. Do you think that verticality has some bearing on establishing initial LGP?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by just another ref

This is true, but this is not the point. The point is, does a preliminary signal absolutely obligate one to make a certain call. I see nothing which indicates this. Others here seem to indicate that the two officials making opposite preliminary signals necessitates the double foul call.

You may not, but I think that is trying to pick nits.

Originally Posted by just another ref

So, you guys correct me if I am wrong. Are you saying that if you are positive it is a blocking foul, but have not made the block signal, but you do have a fist up, and the other guy signals PC, it is ok to walk away from the call, but if you have made the block signal, you will report a double foul?
Also, if the other guy sees your signal, says "My bad," and walks away, what would you do then?

If an official has not signaled anything, than it means little or nothing unless the calling official wants to consider the information. If we use that logic, what if we both have a foul and one thinks it is flagrant and the other thinks it is just intentional? We cannot call both just because. We have to pick one. In this case the rules state if both have signaled/called, then you cannot take either of them back. I do not see anyone interpreting the rules that way other than what you have stated. If it means that much to you I guess you could get into a debate with someone on the floor. I would suggest that you do not do that at that level. You might be the only one feeling that way, because the rules are meant to be the same as the NF interpretation.

Peace

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

What if he were leaning several degrees forward?

I must be missing your point. Do you think that verticality has some bearing on establishing initial LGP?

I'm saying that if you are leaning back, as this guy was, your torso is not facing the opponent. More like facing the ceiling.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

We have to pick one. In this case the rules state if both have signaled/called, then you cannot take either of them back.

These two words are not synonyms. Nevada said that the two terms are used interchangeably in the NCAA books. I'd like to see an example of this.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by just another ref

These two words are not synonyms. Nevada said that the two terms are used interchangeably in the NCAA books. I'd like to see an example of this.

And if the wording is not to you liking, then what are you going to do? It is not going to change the interpretation of the rule.

Peace

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by just another ref

I'm saying that if you are leaning back, as this guy was, your torso is not facing the opponent. More like facing the ceiling.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Do you think that verticality has some bearing on establishing initial LGP?

No, but isn't there a distance requirement? I mean, it's not LGP when a defender stands under the basket facing a dribbler who is in his own back court, right? (Genuine question here, not being a smartazz)

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by just another ref

I'm saying that if you are leaning back, as this guy was, your torso is not facing the opponent. More like facing the ceiling.

Holy carp.

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by mbyron

No, but isn't there a distance requirement?

Technically, no. A player can establish legal guarding position by actively guarding an opponent (which means meeting the criteria for LGP of two feet initially on the floor, torso facing opponent, etc), but there is no distance requirement.

The only time distance enters the discussion is in determining if there is a closely guarded situation.

[IREFU2]

Originally Posted by wrwom

I was watching the game and through the magic of DVR grab the play. Here it is, the slow motion starts about 29 seconds into the video. Since I am very new to this I won't offer an opinion, but I would love to follow the discussion on why this is a block or charge.

Block all the way, no LGP.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by just another ref

I'm saying that if you are leaning back, as this guy was, your torso is not facing the opponent. More like facing the ceiling.

Once LGP is established, you do not need to continue facing the opponent to maintain it.

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by IREFU2

Block all the way, no LGP.

Agree it's a block. Disagree on LGP. The defender had LGP...but LGP doesn't allow you to slide under an airborne player.

[btaylor64]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Great, time for our dose of pro philosophy.

Let me make it short and quick for everyone: FAVOR THE OFFENSE.



Not only are people here saying that, but that's what the NFHS and NCAA rules books both say.

So a defender can just slide underneath a moving and/or dribbling opponent and as long as he is somewhat in front of him its an offensive foul? That just doesn't make good sense to me. Sorry.