|
Blarge alert!!!
Gonzaga v Tennessee
4:48 on the clock in the first half. Gonzaga guard driving down the outside of the FT lane. Jim Burr (L) signals a block, the C (I don't know who he is) signals a PC. The play was in the C's primary, but I believe that Burr made the correct decision. A double personal foul was called and Gonzaga kept the ball on the POI. |
Thank goodness for ESPN360.com
Looked like a block to me. Looked like C was too high (at the 3 point arc) and may have not had a good angle.
Announcers said that Gonzaga kept the ball on AP???? Is this different in NCAA vs. HS or did the announcers kick it? Shoulda been POI. |
I watched the game and saw the play too... So riddle me this, how did we get to a double foul? Is this the resolution when there is a double whistle and the officials can't agree? If so, I suppose I can live with that, but if there is another reason, you'll have to sell me...
Z |
Quote:
The NCAA RULE is the same as the NFHS RULE. If two officials signal conflicting fouls on a play, then the resolution is a double foul. |
Video
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.
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/FV8FpzV1Z7Y&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/FV8FpzV1Z7Y&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object> |
Block. Doesn't look that close to me.
|
It looks like a PC Foul to me, but that being said guys from the East Coast like to just signal fouls without much or any of a stop clock signal. The ball did come from the Center's side. The CCA told officials to let the Lead take all fouls to the basket if there was a dispute. It is clear Jim Burr did not follow the manual on this directive with a stop clock signal. Oh well, that is why he is working on National Television and I am not. :D
Peace |
Quote:
|
Excellent job, wrwom. Thanks for posting the video. Perhaps you would be kind enough to detail the steps you undertook in order to do so. That would be a great help to some of us less savvy computer users. :)
As for the play, it is my opinion that the defender did not obtain his spot on the floor prior to his opponent going airborne. Instead he slid in front of and under him after the dribbler picked up the ball and both of his feet left the floor. The defender did establish LGP and is allowed to move laterally to continue to maintain that guarding position, but he can't do so AFTER the opponent becomes airborne. At that time, he must hold the spot that he has obtained. He may, of course, turn or duck to absorb or lessen the contact. Furthermore, IMO this play was the C's to get right or wrong as it was well within his primary. The L should not have given a preliminary signal as the play was outside of his primary and his partner had a whistle. This is what happens when the officials do not adhere to proper mechanics. |
Though this is in the C's PCA -
blow and hold, blow and hold, blow and hold especially knowing who your partner is (Burr) and knowing he's probably going to come out strong with a call on a play like this |
Quote:
|
H & R..............................block
|
Thanks Nevedaref for posting the detailed explanation, as a newbie I was missing the airborne player part of this play. I kept thinking that the Tenn Player had LGP and was moving obliquely, but missed the part about the airborne player. It is difficult to tell for sure from the angles on the video when the offensive player became airborne in relation to the slide, but I now understand the reason some are seeing this as a block.
As far as getting the video I just happened to have the game on and I have digital cable with a DVR so it records what is currently being watch to allow you to pause it and rewind it. Honestly I was reading the forum and not really watching the game closely when I saw your Blarge alert post, so I backed up the DVR and recorded the play to my DVD recorder. I replayed it a couple of times and then replayed it at slow speed while recording it to the dvd. I then took the dvd into a video editing program, edited it to get just the play, and had the video editor output a file i could upload to YouTube. The details would vary depending upon your hardware, for example I think some DVRs will allow you to directly move the file to a computer without burning it to the DVD first. |
First impression (from the upper camera) was PC, but seeing the lead's angle I thought a clear block -- the bent right knee shows defender clearly sliding over....
but more importantly... what is your configuration at home that allows you to slice and dice the braodcast... put it up on youtube and publish??? How long did that take you, start to finish, wrwom?? edit -- oh, never mind, seems like others were wowed with the quick post up of video too! thanks! |
Block.
|
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. |
Quote:
Let me make it short and quick for everyone: FAVOR THE OFFENSE. :eek: Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
I must be missing your point. Do you think that verticality has some bearing on establishing initial LGP? |
Quote:
Quote:
Peace |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Peace |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
The only time distance enters the discussion is in determining if there is a closely guarded situation. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Officials: Jim Burr, Doug Shows, Bryan Kersey
Technical fouls: TENNESSEE VOLUNTEERS-None. GONZAGA BULLDOGS-None. Attendance: 3914 Score by Periods 1st 2nd Total TENNESSEE VOLUNTEERS.......... 31 43 - 74 GONZAGA BULLDOGS.............. 35 48 - 83 Pretty darn good crew. |
Quote:
Edited to clarify - you're "slide underneath" comment is not a quality one. If the defender can get to a position where the contact is in the torso, then obviously he "slid" there before the offensive player got there. And if that happens, it's a PC foul if the defender had established LGP. |
Not coincidentally, I'm sure, this was forwarded to me by my D3 association:
Quote:
|
Quote:
In the play at hand, what I see is the defender leaning backward as he slides into the path of the dribbler. At contact, the defender's feet are straddling the offensive player. As far as I'm concerned, this defender did not "get there first," and this would have been a block whether the dribbler had gone airborne or not. |
Quote:
He got there first. The problem was that he wasn't there when A1 went airborne. |
Quote:
Sounds a lot like a description of this play to me. |
Quote:
|
"Bellying up" and leaning backwards to avoid taking a shot in the face are two entirely differnt things and in no way should be used to judge whether a collision is a block or a PC foul. There is no restriction on leaning backwards when one is about to get run over.
|
Quote:
A position on the court reaches from floor to ceiling. At contact of this play, I do not see that this defender had established a spot in the path of the dribbler. |
Quote:
The C called a PC (in my opinion) because this was a secondary defender jumping in there and the C didn't get a good look at the whole thing... |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Now having said all that, I think he was the one that got it right. Kid had LGP, slid (huge base...no longer in position). |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
"My last thought on this play is that the mechanics book clearly states that the Lead has primary coverage for this play (p. 42)"--John W. Adams
It would also be nice if Mr. Adams would clarify this mechanic. There is NO WAY that the Lead has primary coverage on a drive to the basket from the Center's side. When the crash is clearly on the Center's side, it has to be his call. Mr. Adams should state that the Lead has primary coverage on a drive to the basket when it comes down the middle of the lane. Basically what they are trying to do is give it to the Lead when the play is on the dividing line and in a gray area. It is absurb to think that the Lead should have primary coverage for a crash which takes place on the block outside the FT lane line on the Center's side. |
Quote:
Quote:
|
Dick Cartmel (5 Final Four Appearances) was at our local meeting last night.
He talked about this very play. He stated that he just received a memo, about Blarges, probably as a result of this play. I actually asked him if he would get together with the other official and determine either a block or a charge....and not go with the dreaded blarge. He said he couldn't do that...they are so scrutinized by video etc. that there is simply no way to change the "call" once they have "signaled" the foul. He also said, as previously stated here, that they are moving more toward having the L take these calls, that are coming at them down the lane. Dick didn't get real specific with that comment...but, I am sure it goes more along the lines of what Navadaref was stating. Good meeting...with a lot of good information from an experienced D1 official. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
This morning's 60 Seconds on Officiating (how did I get on that list, anyway) covers the blarge.
Here's the only interesting comment in that article (to me, anyway): "In a three person crew, mechanics differ on the level. While NFHS/IAABO mechanics still allow the CENTER to officiate their half of the paint ... and CCA mechanics encourage the LEAD to take all block-charges in the paint." |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
If the NCAA is really saying that it wants the Lead official to call on the other half of the lane through those big bodies, then they simply haven't thought this one through very well. That's such a poor idea. PS I am amused by the comment by Goodwillref! :D |
Quote:
The defender came from the C's primary, but the dribbler had also entered the C's primary and that became his most competitive match-up, thus making the other defender a secondary defender, and the crash becomes the L's call. It ain't that hard... |
Quote:
You said it yourself, according the our new directive, the L is responsible for plays coming toward them. The L made the call, and if the C had been "slow to show" (usually covered in pregame), then this might not have been a BLARGE situation. It seems clear cut. |
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:39am. |