Couldn't help but think of todays...

[referee99]

Couldn't help but think of today's and previous back and forths when I saw the following.

With seconds winding down we have a player have their shot blocked and end up on the floor. Sound familiar?

The fun starts at about 1:24.

[just another ref]

I don't see a foul in this play.

[APG]

Play on

[BktBallRef]

I disagree. I don't see how anyone can say there's not a foul on the play when the camera angle is completely different than the angle the Lead had. No, if you had been the Trail, opposite, you may not have a call but the Lead has a different look.

[youngump]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

I disagree. I don't see how anyone can say there's not a foul on the play when the camera angle is completely different than the angle the Lead had.No, if you had been the Trail, opposite, you may not have a call but the Lead has a different look.

Would you concede that the camera angle is good enough to rule out a block?
________
SexMadame

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by referee99

Couldn't help but think of today's and previous back and forths when I saw the following.

With seconds winding down we have a player have their shot blocked and end up on the floor. Sound familiar?

The fun starts at about 1:24.

I've got a PC @ 0:54.

@ 1:24 - I've got a foul.

[asdf]

Gotta love the AAU parents running up and down the sidelines after each close call.

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by youngump

Would you concede that the camera angle is good enough to rule out a block?

No, I wouldn't. If an airborne defender jumps into the path of the shooter and there's contact with the body, that's a block. A defender can be airborne and still commit a block.

In the end, whether it's called a push or a block is in material if the Lead feels there was contact that placed the shooter at a disadvantage.

[zm1283]

That is quite the block mechanic by the L in both the :54 and the 1:24 plays.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

I disagree. I don't see how anyone can say there's not a foul on the play when the camera angle is completely different than the angle the Lead had. No, if you had been the Trail, opposite, you may not have a call but the Lead has a different look.

I agree with that. What I said was, I don't see a foul.

[SAJ]

love the coaches decked out in their Sue Sylvester game gear...classy

[APG]

Originally Posted by just another ref

I agree with that. What I said was, I don't see a foul.

I agree as well. I should have qualified my statement by saying from the camera angle shown, I didn't have a call.

Also here's the embedded video for everyone's convenience.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by jugglingreferee

i've got a pc @ 0:54.

+1

[KMBReferee]

The one @ :54 is definitely a blocking foul; I don't know what in the world Poly was complaining about on that one. The lead could have called that one in his sleep. And the guy narrating the piece doesn't have a clue of what he's talking about.

The "block" at the end of the game was just...bad. Really bad. That isn't a foul in any way, shape, or form. And it really aggravates me when officials rob kids of playing good defense like that. I've seen more than a few calls where fouls were called on clean blocks.

Also, can anyone explain to me what were they conferring about, exactly? She had called the foul; Santa Monica was clearly in the act of shooting, so what's there to discuss? Go ahead and enforce your botched call.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by KMBReferee

The one @ :54 is definitely a blocking foul; I don't know what in the world Poly was complaining about on that one. The lead could have called that one in his sleep. And the guy narrating the piece doesn't have a clue of what he's talking about.

My goodness, I can't believe an official could look at this video (at :54) and not see a PC foul.

I see nothing on the video at 1:24 that suggests a foul. I don't have the L's look at the play, though.