![]() |
Player starting to fall in anticipation of charge
I've heard numerous partners say this type of thing regarding a block/charge situation: If a player is starting to fall/lean back before contact is made, I call that a block."
How does one defend this statement by rule? If the defender has established legal guarding position and then leans back, starts to fall before contact (into the torso) is made by the offensive player, shouldn't this still be a charge? |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Peace |
4-23-3-e
Art 3: After the initial legal guarding position is obtained: e. The guard may turn or duck to absorb the shock of imminent contact. JohnDorian: How in the world would falling away from the A player violate the principle of verticality? |
Turn or Duck...where does it say falling is still legal?
|
Quote:
The guard may move laterrally or obliquely (to include backwards) to maintain position, provided it is not toward the opponent when contact occurs. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Peace |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
But if you want something else to hang your hat on, then consider that a defender, planted in the ball handler's path has established LGP. And one provision of LGP is: "The guard may move laterally or obliquely to maintain position, provided it is not toward the opponent when contact occurs." Falling backward, as Jeff pointed out earlier, is not movement "toward the opponent". |
Quote:
I have also had a 'no call' on this situation. And I had a play like this last night. |
Quote:
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:18am. |