Block/Charge/No Call

[djskinn]

Situation 1

A1 fakes 3 pt shot and drives to the basket. B2, thinking a shot was taking place, has turned his back to A1. A1, driving to the basket, makes contact with B2 (whose back is to the play) and B2 goes to the floor. Think of it as a block/charge play, only B1 is facing the basket instead of defending A1. What would you have?

Situation 2

A1 drives to the basket. B1 has legal guarding position and appears prepared to take a charge. A1 changes path of drive and contact occurs with the shoulder of B1 while attempting the shot. What would you call?

[bas2456]

Originally Posted by djskinn

Situation 1

A1 fakes 3 pt shot and drives to the basket. B2, thinking a shot was taking place, has turned his back to A1. A1, driving to the basket, makes contact with B2 (whose back is to the play) and B2 goes to the floor. Think of it as a block/charge play, only B1 is facing the basket instead of defending A1. What would you have?

Situation 2

A1 drives to the basket. B1 has legal guarding position and appears prepared to take a charge. A1 changes path of drive and contact occurs with the shoulder of B1 while attempting the shot. What would you call?

Regarding situation 1, does the defender lose LGP when he turns his back? I think it's either block or no call, because the contact isn't to the defender's torso.

For Sit. 2, assuming the defender doesn't move laterally when A1 avoids contact, I have no call.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by bas2456

Regarding situation 1, does the defender lose LGP when he turns his back? I think it's either block or no call, because the contact isn't to the defender's torso.

LGP is not a consideration in this play.

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by bas2456

Regarding situation 1, does the defender lose LGP when he turns his back? I think it's either block or no call, because the contact isn't to the defender's torso.

LGP has nothing to do with it. Every player is entitled to a spot on the floor, provided he obtained that space legally. There's nothing in the OP to indicate B2 did anything illegal. If the contact constitutes a foul, the foul is on A1.

In situation 2, if the contact constitutes a foul, the foul is on A1. If not, it's nothing. There is no yes or no answer. It's a judgment call that you mkae based on what you see.

[Kelvin green]

100 percent agree...

In situation 1 why would you ever call it a block. As mentioned before LGP has nothing to do with this. They guy, anticipating a shot, maybe trying to get in position for a rebound and gets run over by A1.

In situation 2 why would you ever penalize a defender for playing legitimate defense? If he has position and A does something ... we penalize B?

Both of these plays though reiterate the necessity of seeing the whole play and refereeing the defense.

[MOofficial]

Situation 1

Very tough play, something has to be called on it... A no call is going to be disaster at any level.

My take on it: If it is the defenders job to legally stop he offensive player from scoring, how in the world does a defender stop the offensive player when his back is turned to him going up to the rim, unless he has eyes in the back of his head.

Man up and take a real charge.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by MOofficial

Situation 1

Very tough play, something has to be called on it... A no call is going to be disaster at any level.

My take on it: If it is the defenders job to legally stop he offensive player from scoring, how in the world does a defender stop the offensive player when his back is turned to him going up to the rim, unless he has eyes in the back of his head.

Man up and take a real charge.

Seriously?! He thought a shot was up and turned around to watch for the rebound and box out. This is a real charge, so call it that way. There is no requirement that a player face his opponent while standing still.

It's the offensive player's responsibility to know where the defenders are and not run them over. This is obviously the offensive player's responsibility.

And you have the benefit of the rule to back you up on it.

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by MOofficial

Man up and take a real charge.

Do you even tell the girls this?

So, are you saying because the defense was not facing the offensive player (like a man), you would call a block?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

Do you even tell the girls this?

So, are you saying because the defense was not facing the offensive player (like a man), you would call a block?

What if he does not work girl's games?

That being said I still think LGP could apply if I am reading this right. But it is not the only factor as it never has to be in these situations.

Peace

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

What if he does not work girl's games?

Even so, he might still tell them that.

Originally Posted by JRutledge

That being said I still think LGP could apply if I am reading this right. But it is not the only factor as it never has to be in these situations.

It doesn't apply in this sit, as the defender thought there was a shot and turned to face the basket for the blockout/rebound. In this case, even though the defender was no longer guarding, they are still entitled to their spot on the floor, and the offense has no addtional rights in any contact. Even if that wasn't the case, it's obvious MOofficial was stating the offensive player should not be charged with a foul because the defender wasn't "man enough" to face the offense. We both know that directly contradicts the rule on guarding, 4-23-3(e), "The guard may turn or duck to absorb the shock of imminent contact."

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

It doesn't apply in this sit, as the defender thought there was a shot and turned to face the basket for the blockout/rebound. In this case, even though the defender was no longer guarding, they are still entitled to their spot on the floor, and the offense has no addtional rights in any contact. Even if that wasn't the case, it's obvious MOofficial was stating the offensive player should not be charged with a foul because the defender wasn't "man enough" to face the offense. We both know that directly contradicts the rule on guarding, 4-23-3(e), "The guard may turn or duck to absorb the shock of imminent contact."

It was not clear in the OP what way the defender was facing. I am just saying it could apply, but that does not mean it is the only factor. You can maintain LGP by turning and moving. You never have to face an opponent to stay legal. And my comments really were not about MOofficial in the first place. I just take a slight issue that the defender in this case could not be in LGP.

Peace

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

It was not clear in the OP what way the defender was facing.

Originally Posted by djskinn

Situation 1

A1 fakes 3 pt shot and drives to the basket. B2, thinking a shot was taking place, has turned his back to A1. A1, driving to the basket, makes contact with B2 (whose back is to the play) and B2 goes to the floor.

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I am just saying it could apply, but that does not mean it is the only factor. You can maintain LGP by turning and moving. You never have to face an opponent to stay legal. And my comments really were not about MOofficial in the first place. I just take a slight issue that the defender in this case could not be in LGP.

Then we agree. Damn, what fun is that?

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

Then we agree. Damn, what fun is that?

This seems to be happening to you a lot. Good thing the season is coming soon.

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by mbyron

This seems to be happening to you a lot. Good thing the season is coming soon.

I don't agree.

(Season's almost here!...)

[Adam]

Now you're just trying to be disagreeable.