The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Thu May 13, 2010, 02:27pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 34
Don't Hit Me!!!

I reffed a game last night and saw a play I don't think I've ever seen before on any level. A1 starts to drive the lane. B1 has perfect position to take the charge (he was standing about 4 ft away from the hoop). As A1 approaches, B1 starts backpedaling. A1 finished his shot (missed it) and ended up in B1's lap on the floor. I called it a block because B1 obviously didn't have his feet set. That being said, he did have legal guarding position before the contact because he was at the spot first (and the contact happened torso-to-torso).

I don't know what made the guy backpedal like that. I've seen guys turn away just to shield themselves from the hit they're about to take...but to start backpedaling was a new one for me. Did I make the right call?
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Thu May 13, 2010, 02:31pm
Courageous When Prudent
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Hampton Roads, VA
Posts: 14,840
LGP established and then back-pedaling would not be a block.

How did the crash occur if B1 was backing up? Did he stop at some point?
__________________
A-hole formerly known as BNR
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Thu May 13, 2010, 02:39pm
Adam's Avatar
Keeper of the HAMMER
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: MST
Posts: 27,190
ABC, his feet do not need to be set; that's the whole point of LGP. Once established, he can back pedal all he wants. Sounds like a PC foul.

We had a very recent discussion on this in a Lebron James thread.
__________________
Sprinkles are for winners.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Thu May 13, 2010, 02:40pm
Do not give a damn!!
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: On the border
Posts: 30,463
Feet being set are not a factor. Seems like you kicked this one based on the rule and the description.

Peace
__________________
Let us get into "Good Trouble."
-----------------------------------------------------------
Charles Michael “Mick” Chambers (1947-2010)
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Thu May 13, 2010, 02:50pm
Back from the DL
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Maine
Posts: 2,540
This is hard to call without seeing it.

The defender is allowed to turn or duck to brace himself for impact, and still maintain LGP. But, back-pedalling? I take that to mean moving straight back, and I can't see how one can maintain LGP going straight back (except to brace, as mentioned).

Laterally, yes. Obliquely, yes. Straight back, how?
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Thu May 13, 2010, 03:11pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 2,183
If the defender is backpedalling, how could he/she initiate the contact?
__________________
I gotta new attitude!
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Thu May 13, 2010, 03:28pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by bainsey View Post
This is hard to call without seeing it.

The defender is allowed to turn or duck to brace himself for impact, and still maintain LGP. But, back-pedalling? I take that to mean moving straight back, and I can't see how one can maintain LGP going straight back (except to brace, as mentioned).

Laterally, yes. Obliquely, yes. Straight back, how?
Once LGP has been established there are only 3 ways to lose it:
1) defender out of bounds
2) defender moves toward offensive player
3) offense gets head and shoulders past front of torso

By the description none of these happened. PC.
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Thu May 13, 2010, 03:47pm
Adam's Avatar
Keeper of the HAMMER
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: MST
Posts: 27,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by bainsey View Post
This is hard to call without seeing it.

The defender is allowed to turn or duck to brace himself for impact, and still maintain LGP. But, back-pedalling? I take that to mean moving straight back, and I can't see how one can maintain LGP going straight back (except to brace, as mentioned).

Laterally, yes. Obliquely, yes. Straight back, how?
Did you read the rule?
__________________
Sprinkles are for winners.
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Thu May 13, 2010, 04:23pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 34
Lgp

I even doubted myself after I made the call...but like I said...I'm not used to seeing guys backpedal in that situation. One of those strange looking plays that left me scratching my head after the game.

Someone asked how contact was made if B1 was moving straight back. A1 was moving much faster and had taken his jump towards the hoop. B1's backpedalling couldn't counteract A1's drive and jump.

I was just looking through the FIBA rules and found that I did in fact kick this call...I kicked it pretty bad too! FIBA rules say:

When judging a block/charge situation involving a player with the ball, an official shall use the following principles:
• The defensive player must establish an initial legal guarding position by facing the player with the ball and having both feet on the floor.
• The defensive player may remain stationary, jump vertically, move laterally or MOVE BACKWARDS in order to maintain the initial legal guarding position.
• When moving to maintain the initial legal guarding position, one or both feet
may be off the floor for an instant, as long as the movement is lateral or
BACKWARDS, but not towards the player with the ball.
• Contact must occur on the torso, in which case the defensive player would be considered as having been at the place of contact first.

Oh well...next time I see this I'll get it right! Hopefully next time B1 will just stay still and "take it like a man" (haha)!
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Thu May 13, 2010, 04:53pm
In Memoriam
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Hell
Posts: 20,211
Quote:
Originally Posted by bainsey View Post
This is hard to call without seeing it.

The defender is allowed to turn or duck to brace himself for impact, and still maintain LGP. But, back-pedalling? I take that to mean moving straight back, and I can't see how one can maintain LGP going straight back (except to brace, as mentioned).

Laterally, yes. Obliquely, yes. Straight back, how?
How can you lose LGP, after establishing it, by moving straight back as long as you're continually keeping your torso in front of your opponent?

Answer: you can't.

That's a basic, bainsey.
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Thu May 13, 2010, 06:40pm
Back from the DL
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Maine
Posts: 2,540
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snaqwells View Post
Did you read the rule?
Are we talking about 4-23-3c?

"Laterally and obliquely?"

Straight back is neither lateral nor oblique.
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old Thu May 13, 2010, 07:01pm
Esteemed Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 22,934
Block ? Charge ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by bainsey View Post
Straight back is neither lateral nor oblique.
Nor is it moving toward the ball handler, which is illegal if contact occurs.
__________________
"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." (John 3:16)

“I was in prison and you came to visit me.” (Matthew 25:36)
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old Thu May 13, 2010, 11:48pm
We don't rent pigs
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 7,627
Quote:
Originally Posted by bainsey View Post
This is hard to call without seeing it.

The defender is allowed to turn or duck to brace himself for impact, and still maintain LGP. But, back-pedalling? I take that to mean moving straight back, and I can't see how one can maintain LGP going straight back (except to brace, as mentioned).

Laterally, yes. Obliquely, yes. Straight back, how?
As long as the defender is moving straight away from the offensive player, as is the case here, it doesn't matter whether he ever had legal guarding position or not.
__________________
I swear, Gus, you'd argue with a possum.
It'd be easier than arguing with you, Woodrow.


Lonesome Dove
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old Fri May 14, 2010, 07:49am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: NB/PEI, Canada
Posts: 788
Interesting thread . . .

Obviously by the rule this cannot be a block. The discussion we often have in our area is whether we call the offensive foul here. Now obviously without seeing the play the timing and intent of both players are are difficult to ascertain and I'm not commenting specifically to what happend here because I didn't see it. The issue we often discuss here being that if the kid is not defending the play, and the offense and defense are niether immediately disdavantage why call anything.

Combine that with the fact that whether they were there legally or illegally someone waiting in the landing spot for an airborne shooter is risky buisness injury wise. The player wants to defend and hold their position fine, if you want to bail out fine but if your not acutally trying to defend and stop the player from scoring (and no one's being excessive) why call anything.

IMO if I've got a kid backpedlaing to avoid contact and an offensive players moving forward to get a shot, I can't see calling a charge because the defense wasn't fast enough to get out of the way. Now if he was just trying to maintain space to challenge as the kid attacks forward that fine reward the d, but in my head i'm seeing a kid trying to back away and just unable to get out of the way fast enough. In that case I'm no calling all the way if possible.

Same issue with kids who stand under neath the backboard allowing players to shoot layups but hoping the airborne shooter will then land on them and they'll get a charge call. Their not trying to defend the play and at that point neither is immediately disadvantaged. Sorry "No call."
__________________
Coach: Hey ref I'll make sure you can get out of here right after the game!

Me: Thanks, but why the big rush.

Coach: Oh I thought you must have a big date . . .we're not the only ones your planning on F$%&ing tonite are we!
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old Fri May 14, 2010, 08:11am
Adam's Avatar
Keeper of the HAMMER
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: MST
Posts: 27,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by just another ref View Post
As long as the defender is moving straight away from the offensive player, as is the case here, it doesn't matter whether he ever had legal guarding position or not.
Good point, we've been focusing on the wrong rule.
__________________
Sprinkles are for winners.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:32am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1