NCAA Secondary Defender - rule change

[IREFU2]

Originally Posted by Tio

The lead has the best chance to get it right. Some officials still think they get first crack if the drive comes from their area even on a secondary defender. I don't like this because 1. There is no way the outside official is able to see the whole play on the legal guarding position of the secondary defender. 2. Now with the new rule, the lead is really the only one who can make a determination on whether the defender was under the cylinder. Crews that trust each other will be fine with the new rule, crews that don't will be in trouble.

I see some blarges coming!!!!!

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

The secondary defender is the L's responsiblity in both 2- and 3-man crews.

MTD, Sr.

[btaylor64]

Originally Posted by IREFU2

I see some blarges coming!!!!!

Why? If the lead calls a block and the slot or Trail call charge, wouldn't everything be trumped if the Lead says "He's in the Restricted Area."

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by btaylor64

Why? If the lead calls a block and the slot or Trail call charge, wouldn't everything be trumped if the Lead says "He's in the Restricted Area."

No. You still have to determine if it is a secondary defender or not....at precisely what time does a defender become one or the other. There is a point at which a secondary defender becomes the primary defender.

And exactly where is this area? Without it being marked, there is going to be a lot of inconsistency. That is why the NBA eventually marked it. And if they can't get their crews to get it right without marking it, how to you think college guys (at all levels) will get it right.

[icallfouls]

The NCAA diagram for this season.

https://www.eofficials.com/ESO_Repos...rt_Diagram.pdf

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by icallfouls

The NCAA diagram for this season.

https://www.eofficials.com/ESO_Repos...rt_Diagram.pdf

That is what I thought the description was saying...and the picture makes it clear. However, without a precise marking on the floor, it will be a gray area and some officials will still not call a charge even if the player is a foot or even three outside that "box" with the claim that the player was "under the basket"...as they already do.

[icallfouls]

here is the rule and rationale for it as well as the rationale for not having it marked on the floor

New Rule. A secondary defender may not establish initial legal guarding position under the basket when playing a player who is in control of the ball (i.e., dribbling or shooting) or who has released the ball for a pass or try for goal. A secondary defender is a teammate who has helped a primary defender who has been beaten by an opponent because he failed to establish or maintain a guarding position. “Under the basket” is defined as from the front and side of the ring to the front of the backboard. A player is considered under the basket when any part of either foot is in this area. (Note: An approved ruling will indicate that a player straddling this area is considered to be under the basket.)


In establishing position in any outnumbering fast break situation, a player may not establish initial legal guarding position under the basket since there is no primary defender.


In both cases, when illegal contact occurs, such contact shall be called a blocking foul, unless the contact is intentional or flagrant.

Rationale:The committee is responding to overwhelming concern from the membership regarding contact under the basket. After some consideration of a restricted arc, the committee decided that court markings were not needed, but changed its rule in reference to secondary player establishing initial guarding position under the basket.

[Jesse James]

While the committee explains their rationale, could they also explain the logic to now let A drive baseline, go up for a reverse lay-up or reverse jam, and completely splatter a stationary secondary defender under the hoop to draw the blocking foul.

How else is a secondary defender supposed to stop that drive?

[amusedofficial]

In establishing position in any outnumbering fast break situation, a player may not establish initial legal guarding position under the basket since there is no primary defender.

This may be the single stupidest statement in the history of basketball. If it's a three on two break, you can't have LGP under the basket? A fast-breaking guard can now drop her shoulder, bang into a big who has established position underneath and get two from the line? How can you have a rule that creates the concept of legal guarding position and then say "wait, it doesn't count based on where the players involved in the contact were several steps before contact, because the principle of advantage/disadvantage doesn't apply in our Special Unmarked Area Of Magical Powers?"

But then, I thought (and still think) the three-point shot is as bad an idea as the designated hitter for the pitcher