Couldn't help but think of todays...

[APG]

Originally Posted by KMBReferee

Once again, the rule says toward, not forward. There's a difference. You can move toward someone without moving forward (which is actually what the center did). And you can move forward without moving toward someone that's to the north of you.

When a defender moves in to cut a slasher off, they're moving toward the dribbler. Doesn't matter what their shoulders or torso are pointing; it's towards them. Therefore they have to take responsibility for any contact drawn due to their movement. The center could have easily stopped her movement and ran parallel with the slasher and made a play on the ball. Instead, she moved under the dribbler's forward movement and made contact.

Well you're using a definition of towards that I've never heard anyone use in relation to legal guarding position. I can concede that maybe from the lead's angle, the player was moving towards (my definition of, not yours) the dribbler. That's a big maybe though. From the angle provided, I'd stick with my PC call. I will say that it seems that you're the only one so far to call a block while the rest have been near unanimous in saying player control (from the angle shown).

Perhaps my view of this play is wrong and someone will come along and explain it better to me. Or perhaps someone will come along and explain this play and LGP better than I have.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by KMBReferee

Once again, the rule says toward, not forward. There's a difference. You can move toward someone without moving forward (which is actually what the center did). And you can move forward without moving toward someone that's to the north of you.

The way you're viewing this, the rule is pointless; as there's no way a player can move laterally to cut off an opponent without breaking your interpretation of "towards."

There is a difference between moving "towards" the opponent's path and moving towards the opponent. In this play, she moves towards her opponent's path; perfectly legal. Don't confuse the two.

As she is moving slightly backward (obliquely) at the point of contact, she's actually moving away from the opponent at that point.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by KMBReferee

Once again, the rule says toward, not forward. There's a difference. You can move toward someone without moving forward (which is actually what the center did). And you can move forward without moving toward someone that's to the north of you.

If the defender was moving "toward" the offensive player and made contact, the contact would have been on the side / shoulder. In the play presented, the defender moved to maintain LGP in the (changing) path of the offensive player. PC foul.

[Eastshire]

Originally Posted by KMBReferee

Once again, the rule says toward, not forward. There's a difference. You can move toward someone without moving forward (which is actually what the center did). And you can move forward without moving toward someone that's to the north of you.

When a defender moves in to cut a slasher off, they're moving toward the dribbler. Doesn't matter what their shoulders or torso are pointing; it's towards them. Therefore they have to take responsibility for any contact drawn due to their movement. The center could have easily stopped her movement and ran parallel with the slasher and made a play on the ball. Instead, she moved under the dribbler's forward movement and made contact.

You're confusing the dribbler's movement towards the defender for the defender's movement towards the dribbler.

[JugglingReferee]

One thing that I saw that I didn't like.

I don't like the mechanic of the T working the arc by moving in the direction towards the DL, when the actions of the players (ball carrier A1 and defender B1) are moving away from the DL and towards the restricted area.

Rather, move with the play as the play moves closer to the basket.

It looks like the T is 7 feet above the 3PLE and the contact is 6 feet below the FTL. With the diagonal taken into account, the T is about 21 feet away.

With the ball at the top, the L has that low-post matchup, even though that matchup is pretty tame. Given that we're to "referee the defense", L will be looking at B2 - who is the secondary defender to A1's drive. Why does the T have a whistle on a crash as she moves away from the play and is clearly the L's call to make?

Of course I agree to get the call correct, but if you watch the video, the T is still trying to get to a spot to sell the call even after the L closed in and already gave a prelim.

Maybe it's just me, but as far as the T is concerned, it's what not to do. YMWV.

[KMBReferee]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

The way you're viewing this, the rule is pointless; as there's no way a player can move laterally to cut off an opponent without breaking your interpretation of "towards."

No it isn't. It's simple: don't create contact by moving into the dribbler. She could have easy quit on the charge and still have been able to maintain defensive pressure inside without making contact. Frontcourt basketball players do it all the time.

There is a difference between moving "towards" the opponent's path and moving towards the opponent. In this play, she moves towards her opponent's path; perfectly legal. Don't confuse the two.

I didn't. She moved towards the opponent. The distance between the two became shorter because she was moving towards the opponent. Thus, she is liable for contact made.

As she is moving slightly backward (obliquely) at the point of contact, she's actually moving away from the opponent at that point.

She didn't move backwards even an inch. If anything, considering the volleyball line that she was stepping on when she began the cutoff, she actually moved forward from that point. Look at her feet. C'mon.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by KMBReferee

How can that be a PC foul? The center slid towards her to cut her off, and was never set. She clearly undercut the ballhandler as she was going up for the shot. That's a blocking foul on the center.

Set? Since when is that a requirement for obtaining and then maintaining LGP?

This is a clear, no-doubt-about-it PC foul and (quite frankly) a terrible call by an official who wasn't properly officiating the defense.

Notice you're walking alone here. As a good friend frequently says, "When it's you against the world, back the world."

[Raymond]

0:54--with benefit of watching the play on video as opposed to live action I have a PC. But I can understand if the Lead saw something different from his angle.

Last second shot: I have nothing on that play. And the Lead was blowing her whistle as soon as the shot was blocked. Based on the timing of her whistle and her angle on the play I don't see how she comes up with that call. Again, with benefit of video replay that she doesn't have.

[Eastshire]

Originally Posted by KMBReferee

I didn't. She moved towards the opponent. The distance between the two became shorter because she was moving towards the opponent. Thus, she is liable for contact made.

The distance was closed by the dribbler not the defender.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

0:54--with benefit of watching the play on video as opposed to live action I have a PC. But I can understand if the Lead saw something different from his angle.

Last second shot: I have nothing on that play. And the Lead was blowing her whistle as soon as the shot was blocked. Based on the timing of her whistle and her angle on the play I don't see how she comes up with that call. Again, with benefit of video replay that she doesn't have.

I was going to say that before, but I got distracted. It appears the lead anticipates a foul on that last second play. Again, I don't have the view the lead does....

[walter]

The dribbler is going at an angle, the center gets in front of her and all the contact is in the torso. Time and distance don't matter. I don't see how this can be a block. The only possible explanation is the lead identified the secondary defender late and didn't see the dribbler until the crash. Other than that, this is an EASY PC call if you see the whole play.

As for the trail's movement, I have actually been instructed at camp to move out and toward the middle of the floor to maintain vision between the players. If you look at the view of the trail, that may be what she is doing. She nevers gives a prelim signal (easy JAR), so I wonder, given she had the same angle of the play as we did, if she had the same call as the lead? We will never know.

[mj]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

0:54--with benefit of watching the play on video as opposed to live action I have a PC. But I can understand if the Lead saw something different from his angle.

Last second shot: I have nothing on that play. And the Lead was blowing her whistle as soon as the shot was blocked. Based on the timing of her whistle and her angle on the play I don't see how she comes up with that call. Again, with benefit of video replay that she doesn't have.

I'd say the same thing BadNews. KMB must never call a PC foul if he doesn't have one there from that angle.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

if the defender was moving "toward" the offensive player and made contact, the contact would have been on the side / shoulder. In the play presented, the defender moved to maintain lgp in the (changing) path of the offensive player. Pc foul.

+1

[JugglingReferee]

Also evidence that it was a PC: after the contact, A1 has her feet down where B2 used to have her feet. Had it been a block, A1 would have careened to a different location.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by KMBReferee

How can that be a PC foul? The center slid towards her to cut her off, and was never set.

Are you really an official?