What is that league teaching its officials?
 

Watch the third clip from the top and explain to me how this is a blocking foul, even by NBE standards.

Video Rule Book - Home


"To get into a legal position, the defender needs to establish himself in the path of the offensive player before contact is made and before he starts his upward shooting motion"

Sure looks like he meet those two requirements to me, yet the official position of the league office is that this is a blocking foul. :confused:

In an attempt to discern what the heck the league is trying to get from its officials, I went and viewed all of the video clips under blocking/charging.

What I discovered is that the charging foul clips are so blatant that Stevie Wonder could call them, while some of those labeled as blocking fouls are debatable. I even believe that one of them is outright incorrect and that is the one I mentioned in the first post in this thread.

Therefore, my conclusion is that the league is telling it's officials that if the play isn't so clearly a charge that it is laughable, then a block is the desired call. That seems to fit nicely with what I've always thought about the NBE--FAVOR THE OFFENSE!

Thanks for posting the link Nevada. As someone who hasn't reached the level of breaking down tape, there's certainly some very interesting and entertaining film here worthy of review and discussion (traveling, jump stops, etc.) at all levels.

In other news, the sky is blue.
:rolleyes:

<font color = blue>The sky is just kidding?</font> :confused:

It is a good resource for some video clips of plays, but an NFHS or NCAA official can't go by the conclusion that the NBA level assigns to them. One has to remember to evaluate the plays using NFHS or NCAA rules and come to a proper conclusion. As we've pointed out numerous times the criteria for judging plays is different at the various levels.

I certainly think that there is benefit to be gained from watching those videos, if done with the proper mindset.

Agreed. I think it would be excellent training for my Association (or any one for that matter) to eliminate the NBE verbiage to the right of the film and just watch the plays develop and discuss them using their level (NFHS, FIBA, NCAA) rules.

Really Nevada? I just don't see that the defender was ever in the path of the offensive player in this one. He was still moving trying to get into the path but didn't quite get there before the contact. It wasn't like he was in the path and moving to maintain position.

What do you mean by "sky"? I know that usually after midnight the sky is black. When the clouds come over it is usually an off white or grey.... Heck I'm just glad you are getting in the BLUE FONT spirit. Who said old dogs can't learn new tricks

I watched the video before I read any of the commentary about the play. I would have gone with a block as well. It appeared to me, especially from the endline angle, that the defender leaned into the ball handler. On the non official terminology scale, the defender didn't "take it in the chest" which some consider the #1 determinate of a block/charge. It further could be argued, that the defender was out side his vertical plane when you see the way he leans sideways.
As to the explaination, the fact that the NBA would favor the offense is a no brainer. Too bad it really doesn't work!

Al Sleet, The Hippy Dippy Weatherman ...
 

YouTube - George Carlin 'The Hippy Dippy Weatherman'

(Note: R rated. Make sure the kiddies, or your Mom, are in another room.)

I agree with this. Especially after seeing the replay from the baseline camera, I had no problem with the blocking call. I didn't think the defender "beat him" to the spot.

Fixed it for you. What, you weren't joking?

I said SOME not I!!! Plus, since it was a rules thing, JR wants me to use a different color BLUE font and I just cant settle on one.:D

Just wondering why you threw it into a rules discussion, as it's completely irrelevant.

FWIW, I've got a block.

Sure looks like a block to me....just sayin...

This is definitely a block. He attempts to get in the path but fails to due to the off. player changing his path.

Every level has different criteria and within the NBA criteria this is a block!

Please stop the NBA Hate
 

IMO this is a block in EVERY level of basketball. Whatever criteria you want to use or no matter how you want to term it, the defender is not legal. He did not get to the spot and is leaning into the offensive players path to create the contact.

And I dont post here too often but I lurk from time to time. I don't get the constant bashing of the NBA and its officials. Yes, officiating in the NBA is DIFFERENT than men's college, or women's, or high school. But different doesn't necessarily make it better or worse. Officiating is somewhat different at all levels.

The constant bashing of the NBA and its officials, referring to it as the NBE, is really old and kinda pathetic for people who are basketball officials. IMO, you are no better than the idiots in the crowd at a high school or AAU game yelling at the officials when they really don't have a clue as to what they are talking about. We all know that officiating is a thankless job and we all know how difficult it can be. Imagine calling games with the size and athleticism of NBA players. It's easy to sit on the sideline or your couch and criticize.

I would expect more from people who actually call games and call themselves basketball officials.

Even though I disagree with your opinion, I respect your right to have that opinion. And that's true even though you obviously don't have the same respect for anybody else to be able to form their own opinion also. It's not up to you...or me...to tell anybody what they can or can't post on this forum.

Think about it.....

I have to agree with those who say block on this. Defender looks like he might be bracing for contact, but he creates contact by dropping his shoulder out of his vertical space IMO.

Ummm... where do I indicate that I have a lack of respect for others to voice their opinions or that they "can or can't" post anything?

In my post I twice stated "IMO" and said that I would expect more from fellow officials. Nowhere did I say what people can or cant post.

If we are taking votes...

I vote for block.

Looking at the angle from the baseline I would have called it a block. This would be a block for me in a NFHS game or a game using NBA rules.

I think the term "NBA rules" is an oxymoron, like "congressional ethics". :p

And if you'd take a second to actually try and comprehend whatinthehell you're reading, you might also discover that we're not really blaming the officials. As Nevada posted originally in this thread, the problem lies with the direction that the NBE officials are being given. It's a league problem. The usage of NBE to show National Basketball Entertainment is an indictment of the league, not it's officials per se. NBE officials are the most over-regimented and over-supervised of any officials' group in the world imo. And whomever(whoever?) is directing/supervising 'em is doing one piss-poor job.

Someone is telling the NBE officials that it's OK for BronBron to take 4 steps on a breakaway dunk or Shaq to have a hall-of-fame career by running over people in the paint.

Again, for the umpteenth time..if you check old posts...the problem with current NBE officiating is the clowns who are formulating it's current policies and directing/supervising it's officiating staff to ignore it's own rule book. Imo if they'd just let their people officiate the damn games, there'd be a helluva lot less complaining from everybody.

Comprehend what Ive read? I stated (if YOU would comprehend what you read) that I dont post here too much but do lurk from time to time. So sorry, I havent read every word of every thread of NBA critiques.

Based on what I've seen here I think the criticism of NBA officiating (be it the officials themselves or the direction they are receiving) is overstated. And calling it NBE is childish, IMO.

You are entitled to your opinion and I am entitled to mine. I'll agree to disagree and leave it that. Have a great one.

I've got a charge on this. The defender gets both feet on the floor in the path of the offensive player. Sure, he leaned a little. But he certainly did not create the contact, the offensive player barreled right through him.

That's the same way that I see this play, but I guess that we have the minority opinion.

No matter how you cut it, there was never more than 50% overlap of the torsos and the defender leaned to get as much as he did. Until just before the contact, you could see the offensive players numbers clearly and unobstructed. And with the offensive player's path carrying him to the inside relative to the camera angle, the actual amount of overlap was even less than it may have appeared from that camera angle. A player still moving in at the time of contact and getting, at best, 50% overlap is not in the path.

Why isn't the defender allowed to still be moving at the time of contact in this situation? There doesn't appear to be any upward movement by the offensive player prior to the contact. Isn't the defender allowed to be moving, even by NBE standards, in the case of guarding an opponent moving on the floor?

How much in the path of the opponent must he be? 100%, 90%, 80%, etc. If some of his body is in the path of the opponent, isn't he in his opponent's path?

I've noticed from the videos on the website in which contact occurs on the side of the dribbler or the defender that these are labeled as blocking fouls.
However, no where in the text of the rules does it state this principle or articulate that the contact must be in the front of the torso for a charging foul. Perhaps that is the way that it is being taught at that level, but if so, the teaching doesn't match the text of the rules.

From a previous Nevada post...."I'm no NBA rules expert..."

Yet now you know what matches and doesn't match the text of NBA rules. Make up your mind, either you know the rules and the league officials aren't matching it, or perhaps you don't know the NBA rules and guidelines. Therefore you are no different than the millions of fans who THINK they know what is right and wrong in an NBA game and therefore decide it best to run down the league and its officials. I would expect this to be a no brainer, but if you are in the vast minority of an opinion, chances are pretty good that you're incorrect...just something I learned growing up on the farm FWIW.

:rolleyes:

Do you think maybe he went to the rule and checked before making that statement? Maybe, just maybe?

Now, if you can show us in the text of the NBA rule where it says what Nevada claims it doesn't say.....

....I'll be surprised.

Nah...he wouldn't do that...it's easier to just find somthing to b*tch about! ;)

The NBA rules book is online and available for anyone to read for free. So I've read it, and very recently in fact. However, that no more makes me an expert on the subject than reading Hamlet would make me an expert on Shakespeare.

The video clips are also available for anyone to view, so I've watched them.

I and anyone else can see that what is shown in the video doesn't match what is written in the rules book.

I have no idea about their guidelines and the specific instruction which is provided to their officials. I'm not someone who receives that stuff.

I have never called a game using NBA rules. Therefore, I have no experience with judging plays under them.

My only claim is that what they are showing doesn't match what they have written and publicly distributed.

Perhaps Mark Cuban will return to the forum and we can ask him. :D

I don't think you can have all of this and still not take the contact squarely in the chest. If the defender can make a play like this and have it called a charge, where would the line be drawn to make it a block? I think it would start to change from official to official, which brings me to my next point.

NBA officials might be highly "over-regimented", but they are way more consistent than high school or college officials. I think a high level of consistency is the goal - what makes up that consistency will forever be debated.

As a former Shaq fan (when he wore purple and gold) I would welcome all the calls against him when he allegedly runs someone over. However, then you would have to call all the fouls when someone is hanging off him. If this happened, he would shoot 20 free throws a game until an adjustment was made or he fouled out for running over people (whichever comes first). I think the end result would be 15 dunks per game for him; he can move his feet a little or at least he could in his younger days.

I'm in the camp that thinks it is hypocritical to say someone is dumping on college/high school officials then criticize NBA officials. I would hope the same people would be against politics in the work place, favoritism in associations, etc. since it is similar.

I agree with this statement the most.

Peace

Well, your opinion on this is misinformed. There is no general bashing of NBA officials in this forum. Sometimes an official will get criticized for a call, just like an NCAA or NFHS official will in these threads. You came into this thread talking about "NBA official bashing" yet there isn't a single post in this thread in which someone criticizes an NBA official.

As for the play in question, I have a block mainly because B2 slams his shoulder into A1's face. And this happens because B2 turns his body into A1 to initiate the contact.

Fair enough.

As I said, I'm not on this forum too much. Perhaps my initial post was an overreaction. This past weekend I worked some AAU games with a friend of mine who is in the D-league and worked NBA games during the lockout in the pre-season. We discussed NBA officiating at length and when I came on here I saw this thread and remembered several others where there seems to be a lot of criticism of NBA officiating (overall not necessarily of individual officials). And I saw the constant references to NBE which IMO is very derisive.

So I said my piece. Everyone is entitled to their opinions. I don't come on here to be antagonistic though I see how my initial post could be taken that way. This is good forum and though I'm not a regular here I do check in from time to time and find this place to be pretty informative. I still disagree with the way many people on here seem to characterize the NBA game and officiating but it is what it is and I'll move on.

I think, if you go back and look, the complaints are about the NBA "rules" and the way the officials are told to enforce them. They are complaints about the administration of the league and how it is not really basketball, but rather entertainment (à la WWE).

You might be right in theory, but that still is a ridiculous characterization. Officials in all pro leagues are told to call things a certain way. Just like if you work in a D1 conference, you call the game how the supervisor wants you to or you do not work. And the WWE is completely made up and fake. Everything from what the individuals say to what punch is thrown is choreographed. The NBA is not that way and the rules are there to make the average person watch. They are not for us who work high school and college to approve. And by trying to get on the NBA for the rules, you can make the leap that the officials are not doing their jobs either. Do you think NFL officials do not call the game the way they are told? Now can people keep making that characterization? Of course this is a board that allows that thing. I just think it is sad that people get upset about one type of characterization and do not see the same thing in this characterization. Because the NF decided tomorrow to change the rules to some NBA rules, then we would have to deal with it or stop officiating basketball.

Peace

Your response still worries about what people say about the officials. That is NOT the basic complaint that I've read on this forum about the NBA. Most people agree that the officials are doing what they are asked to do. The complaint is that what they are asked to do by the league is not officiate basketball.

I get what you and others are saying and the criticism of NBA rules and the way officials are directed to call the games but I still agree with Jrut's post and think you may be missing our point a bit.

To compare the NBA to the WWE IS ridiculous. WWE is completely choreographed and is not real competition. It is purely entertainment. The NBA, regardless of what you think of the rules and their application, is a competitive professional SPORT. It's a very slippery slope when you make this comparison because it is not a far leap from what you are suggesting to then begin to say the competition is not real and that outcomes are fixed. Which, of course, is why Stern is so aggressive in fining players and coaches for their public comments about the officiating. When you state that what they are being asked to do is not officiate basketball you are also suggesting that they are complicit in whatever it is you think the NBA is other than basketball.

And they are officiating basketball. Just because you may not agree with all of the rules does not mean its not basketball. I think its very disingenuous to suggest that we, as high school and college officials, have this "true and pure" sport of basketball while the NBA is something foreign. The NBA is basketball played at the highest level. The rules are designed to create freedom of movement and allow players to display their talents and athleticism. Are there rules perfect? No. Are there things that people, including myself, dont agree with? Absolutely. But that is just our opinion, just like others may have opinions about some of the rules in college and high school.

This is what was behind my initial post. It just irritates the hell out of me when people constantly complain about NBA officiating and rules because it does not take long before all of the "entertainment" and conspiracy theory BS comes up.

Agreed...

We should be nothing but supportive of our colleagues regardless of the level they work.

Because movement is a privilege of having LGP...which requires having already been in the path.
Not unless they already established LGP...which I don't think this player did.
More than getting his shoulder to the middle of the oppoenents torso while still moving in.
It is not about being on the side vs. front, it is about having the torso IN the path of the other player's torso....their (and many others') definition of the width of a player's "path" is obviously narrower than yours.

I don't see that this defender was ever in the path.

A little off topic -- but as a former professional wrestler (and theater major - so I know what choreographed is haha), I can attest to the fact that 95% of our matches are never "choreographed" -- the outcomes ARE decided and we'll talk through how the match will end so the "referee" knows when to count to 3.

So that's what I take from what people are saying on here when they call it NBE -- I think it is a slap in the face to our colleagues, essentially calling the league rigged and thus them cheaters. I know (or HOPE) that's not the intention -- but like you VATerp, thats how it comes across to me.

Did you ever "wrestle" anyone famous?

Mr Kettle, I'd like to introduce you to Mr Pot. Mr Pot, this is Mr Kettle.

I worked mainly with WCW, so worked with a lot of those guys -- Meng was one of my trainers (big Samoan guy), Billy Gunn, Eddie Guerrero (RIP)... in a battle royal got knocked around by a lot of famous guys hahah.

And while the punches are pulled, a chair to the head is still a chair to the head, getting slammed on your back is still being slammed to your back, etc.

Agreed. The defender was still moving into the dribbler when contact was made, as the dribbler had changed direction to move around him.

That's fine. I'm sure it's not the first one you've ever missed. :D

I agree that the defender can still move laterally. If he had taken one more step to his right and taken the contact more squarely in the chest, I think I would be more inclined to have a charge.

I agree....1 more step to the right and this would be a charge. (step being at least 1 foot or so).

It's at least the third. ;)