Charge?

[Spence]

Defender is planted in the lane facing the driving dribbler. Dribbler leaves his feet going for a layup. Defender keeps feet planted but starts to fade back a bit with his upper body right before contact. Contact was in the torso of the defender. I signal PC. Coach says no since the defender was "falling back."

Correct call?

[grunewar]

Originally Posted by Spence

Coach says no since the defender was "falling back."

Correct call?

Are you listening to a coach? If it's as you described - correct call.

[NewNCref]

Sounds good to me. Player gained and maintained a legal guarding position.

There is no requirement that the defender be completely stationary. I'm sure BillyMac will be along with another myth busted shortly.

[Spence]

Originally Posted by grunewar

Are you listening to a coach? If it's as you described - correct call.

I told the coach it was right call but I wanted to verify with those that actually know rules.

[grunewar]

Understand Spence. Gotcha.

17) A defensive player does not have to remain stationary to take a charge. A defender may turn away or duck to absorb contact, provided he or she has already established legal guarding position, which is both feet on the playing court and facing the opponent. The defender can always move backwards or sideways to maintain a legal guarding position and may even have one or both feet off the playing court when contact occurs. That player may legally rise vertically. If the defender is moving forward, then the contact is caused by the defender, which is a blocking foul.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Spence

Defender is planted in the lane facing the driving dribbler. Dribbler leaves his feet going for a layup.

Originally Posted by NewNCref

Sounds good to me. Player gained and maintained a legal guarding position.

There is no requirement that the defender be completely stationary. I'm sure BillyMac will be along with another myth busted shortly.

This is not even a LGP issue. In the OP, if the defender is planted in the lane, awaiting the dribbler, it doesn't matter which way he was facing. He still doesn't have to be completely stationary, along as is movement is away from the approaching offensive player.

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by Spence

Defender is planted in the lane facing the driving dribbler. Dribbler leaves his feet going for a layup. Defender keeps feet planted but starts to fade back a bit with his upper body right before contact. Contact was in the torso of the defender. I signal PC. Coach says no since the defender was "falling back."

Correct call?

Definitely!

[just another ref]

I actually had a play like this earlier this year. Man to man defense. Point guard beats his man and takes off just inside the free throw line. This kid had some serious hang time. But another defender was standing in the lane guarding his man the whole time, more or less facing the sideline. He looked up and saw the point guard coming at him and kind of shrunk away from the contact. Point guard's knee hit him probably in the upper kidney area, and they both crashed to the ground. Easy PC call. Coach screamed, "No, that can't be on my man! He's gotta square up to take the charge!"

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by NewNCref

There is no requirement that the defender be completely stationary. I'm sure BillyMac will be along with another myth busted shortly.

Originally Posted by grunewar

17) A defensive player does not have to remain stationary to take a charge. A defender may turn away or duck to absorb contact, provided he or she has already established legal guarding position, which is both feet on the playing court and facing the opponent. The defender can always move backwards or sideways to maintain a legal guarding position and may even have one or both feet off the playing court when contact occurs. That player may legally rise vertically. If the defender is moving forward, then the contact is caused by the defender, which is a blocking foul.

This is the way I explain the rule to rookie officials. Once the defender establishes a legal guarding position, the player may legally move in five of eight directions: left, back left, back, back right, and right. It is illegal for the defender to move forward right, forward, or forward left, and make contact. There may be exceptions for an airborne shooter, but this keeps it simple for rookie officials.

[christianH]

Even if the defender was moving backwards it would be a charge, wouldn't it?

As defender was at the right spot in time

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by christianH

Even if the defender was moving backwards it would be a charge, wouldn't it?

As defender was at the right spot in time

Coach, he was moving backwards and your player still managed to run over him!

Yes, PC is proper call.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

This is the way I explain the rule to rookie officials. Once the defender establishes a legal guarding position, the player may legally move in five of eight directions: left, back left, back, back right, and right. It is illegal for the defender to move forward right, forward, or forward left, and make contact. There may be exceptions for an airborne shooter, but this keeps it simple for rookie officials.

You missed one direction -- UP.

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Coach, he was moving backwards and your player still managed to run over him!

I often use this line with coaches, and it works every single time.

If I think the coach isn't the sharpest tool in the shed, I change the quote to "Coach, defender was moving backwards, which gave your player more room to avoid contact, but he still managed to run over him!"

[Spence]

What about the following scenario?

A1 driving. B1 wants to take charge but starts to fall backwards way too early. He falls to the floor (without having been contacted by A1) and as A1 lands A1 trips over B1 and goes down.

Anything on B1?

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by Spence

What about the following scenario?

A1 driving. B1 wants to take charge but starts to fall backwards way too early. He falls to the floor (without having been contacted by A1) and as A1 lands A1 trips over B1 and goes down.

Anything on B1?

If not a T for faking being fouled, then how about a block on B1? What do you think?