Help me work through a block/charge scenario.

[slow whistle]

Originally Posted by CoachCER

I think that is what he is pushing for here.

Talking in hypotheticals, what kind of action with the shoulder would you need to see to come up with an intentional/flagrant on A1?
What if he saw the defender stepping and lowered his shoulder just before contact?
I don't think that happened here, as this player dips his shoulder a lot on drives to the basket, even when not in traffic.

My assistant director was sitting with me, and his take was A1 dips to absorb contact. I personally think he does it out of instinct for no particular reason.

I will say in almost 20 years of officiating and longer watching/playing I don't recall ever seeing a shoulder like the one you describe that resulted in an intentional/flagrant foul if that tells you anything. It would have to be a scenario where I judged that the shoulder was not part of his move to the basket, but that he went out of his way to seek out the defender and deliver the shoulder to him intentionally - and I mean REALLY went out of his way. More than likely there would also be something leading up to this play that would tip me off that A1 was looking for trouble if I judged it to be intentional/flagrant.

Bob, would you really have a double foul in this scenario where you judge that A1 initiated contact deemed intentional/flagrant? I could see your second example about A1 punching B1 after B1 contacted him illegally, but in this case if the first contact is A1 initiating intentional contact on B2, do you have a foul on B2 also?

[slow whistle]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Coach, you got anything on this?

Yeah b/c if he went airborne, then B1 arrived at the spot, and then A1 gave him an airborne/intentional shoulder, I'd love to see that play. We're talking Ricky "The Dragon" Steamboat now!

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by slow whistle

Yeah b/c if he went airborne, then B1 arrived at the spot, and then A1 gave him an airborne/intentional shoulder, I'd love to see that play. We're talking Ricky "The Dragon" Steamboat now!

Yep, that's the part I'm having a problem with. If B1 was late (after elevation) how/where did he take the contact from a dipped shoulder?

Jimmy "Superfly" Snuka maybe.

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Yep, that's the part I'm having a problem with. If B1 was late (after elevation) how/where did he take the contact from a dipped shoulder?

Jimmy "Superfly" Snuka maybe.

Could have been on a "hop" rather than airborne to shoot. A1 was going to return to the ground before going up for the shot.

At least, that's the way I envisioned it.

[CoachCER]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Coach, you got anything on this?

My take was that A1 started his move to the basket and had left his feet before B1 slid in. I said earlier B1 slid under, because B1 came into the play leaning back trying to pick up the charge late.

I do appreciate all of the feedback I am getting from this, and it will help me explain this better to the coach.

[CoachCER]

Originally Posted by jdw3018

Could have been on a "hop" rather than airborne to shoot. A1 was going to return to the ground before going up for the shot.

At least, that's the way I envisioned it.

Kind of the opposite. He did a hop/jump stop, and was exploding out of it to the goal. He was in the lane, maybe 8' from the basket.

[CoachCER]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Yep, that's the part I'm having a problem with. If B1 was late (after elevation) how/where did he take the contact from a dipped shoulder?

Jimmy "Superfly" Snuka maybe.

The shoulder wasn't dipped when contact was made, but was dipped as he started the move, which is what caught Coach b's attention.

Think of A1 coming to a jump stop. As he gathers himself, he drops his shoulder. He jumps out and up, and brings his shoulder through and up as he brings the ball to the basket in an ugly shooting motion for a lay up.

As he moves out and is bringing the shoulder up, B1 slides right into his space, and receives the hit from the shoulder as A1 is bringing his upper body up to the goal. B1 was leaning back as he slid under A1, getting his lower body closer to b1, and his upper body farther back, which is where the contact occurred as A1 did his out and up move.

As I said, this was one of those ugly sequences that seems to occur only in bad rec ball.

[fullor30]

It sounds to me that the coach is associating degree of contact with culpabilty, which of course is wrong. A1 airborne on a drive, B1 slides underneath and is flattened along with a blocking call, would be an analogy to tell your coach.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by CoachCER

..... you can't have a charge and a blocking call symultaneously.

I thought everybody knew that.

[Back In The Saddle]

When I was young and stupid (I'm older now) I used to jump my truck off of a drop-off next to the driveway at the back exit to where I worked. I'd get going at a good clip, go airborne, and then land in the road and tear off toward home. Which was all just fun and games until one night I discovered after going airborne that another vehicle had been in my blind spot (which, when I was young and stupid was larger than most people's). The really interesting thing about being airborne in a vehicle is that no matter how hard you crank the wheel or stomp on the brakes...you just keep heading the same direction at the same speed. I don't know, it has something to do with physics.

Same thing in this case. It's not like the shooter went headhunting for the defender. When the shooter dipped his shoulder and went airborne toward the basket, there was nobody in his path. But once he's airborne, if the defender steps into his path...there ain't much the shooter can do about it. It's the own defender's fault he got creamed, and the foul is just insult to (self-inflicted) injury.

You might also want to point out to this coach that a player dipping his shoulder is not a rule, it's only a rule of thumb.

[grunewar]

Originally Posted by Back In The Saddle

The really interesting thing about being airborne in a vehicle is that no matter how hard you crank the wheel or stomp on the brakes...you just keep heading the same direction at the same speed. I don't know, it has something to do with physics.

When I was in the military (back in the day) I took an Anti-Terroroism and Evasive Driving Class in Europe (Audi's, Merc's, BMW's, Opal's, etc). Very cool.

When you're car is sliding on ice/snow and out of control - this is your exact same reaction - push that break pedal through the floor. It's not until you release the break pedal will you be able to control the car and avoid whatever it is you're trying to avoid. If you keep that break pedal down, you will continue to go straight no matter how hard you turn that wheel.

Break, pause, release, steer.

We now return you to your regularly scheduled programs......

[Adam]

Originally Posted by grunewar

When I was in the military (back in the day) I took an Anti-Terroroism and Evasive Driving Class in Europe (Audi's, Merc's, BMW's, Opal's, etc). Very cool.

When you're car is sliding on ice/snow and out of control - this is your exact same reaction - push that break pedal through the floor. It's not until you release the break pedal will you be able to control the car and avoid whatever it is you're trying to avoid. If you keep that break pedal down, you will continue to go straight no matter how hard you turn that wheel.

Break, pause, release, steer.

We now return you to your regularly scheduled programs......

You know, I learned this lesson in a Pontiac 6000, when I was 16. It's one of the first things you're taught about driving when you learn in a small midwest town; where snow and ice are just facts of life.

[just another ref]

I see this play as fairly common. When the block is called, the fans scream, "No! He lowered his shoulder!" Even the coach, who knows his player was late to the spot, might say, "Yeah, but watch him lowering that shoulder next time."

[Juulie Downs]

Originally Posted by Back In The Saddle

. I don't know, it has something to do with physics.

Darn those laws of nature!

Same thing in this case. It's not like the shooter went headhunting for the defender. When the shooter dipped his shoulder and went airborne toward the basket, there was nobody in his path. But once he's airborne, if the defender steps into his path...there ain't much the shooter can do about it. It's the own defender's fault he got creamed, and the foul is just insult to (self-inflicted) injury.

That's how I'm seeing this. Even if the shooter saw the defender moving in and lowered the shoulder as a warning, there's nothing illegal about that.

The only way I could see this being anything but a simple block/charge equation, is if the shooter started his move to the basket, saw the defender and THEN adjusted his path as he lowered his shoulder to deliberately ram the defender. I think I'd call that at least intentional.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Juulie Downs

... if the shooter started his move to the basket, saw the defender and THEN adjusted his path as he lowered his shoulder to deliberately ram the defender. I think I'd call that at least intentional.

Or the shooter sees the defender coming and knows he has him beat. He might adjust his posture without adjusting his path, to in effect deliver a blow rather than receive one. I still got a block.