Guys,
This situation didn't happen to me, but occurred in a tournament that I was working in this weekend. We had a rivalry game between the 2 5A boys teams in town, and we had the following occur, and I was interested in your thoughts.....

There is about 1:20 left on the clock in a 2 point game. A1, a future texas tech boys bb player, drives hard baseline and crashes into b1 who appeared to be set and in legal guarding position. The lead official comes out with a block, and the coach for Team a goes ballistic. Our lead official tells the coach for Team A that he was going to call a charge, but that his player had a foot touching the line, and therefore wasn't in legal guarding position at the time. My partners and I for another game looked and looked in both the NF case book and rule book and found nothing that said that you couldn't take a charge that way. Your thoughts ladies and gentlemen??????

We've had this discussion before.

I don't buy it.

PC foul.

Rephrasing ....

If a player has a foot OoBounds (or otherwise not cleanly on the court .... can they be fouled? Correct?

Or are U asking about being eligable for a charge only?

Interesting.

I guess just for the part of being in legal guarding position for taking the charge.

That explanation is not only nonsense, but wrong. The rules book only says the guard must initially have both feet on the floor. It does not have a requirement that both feet be inbounds.
I am just wondering why the coach of team a went crazy? Shouldn't he be pleased that the foul was on B1?

B1 still has legal guarding position, even with a proverbial toe on the line.

Where the situation could get sticky is if the ball touches or is touched by B1.

you are right...I meant that the coach for Team B went ballistic....

My thought is that I wonder how that official managaed to get a 5A varsity game with such poor rule knowledge. Maybe the assignor is more interested in presence. :-)

Z

..I think my argument here is that he should have just gone with "coach he wasn't there" and left it as a judgement call, instead of bringing the rulebook into it. IMHO that was mistake number one..

Not sure about NFHS, but....

NCAA Rule 4, Section 33, Article 6.

a. The guard shall have both feet touching the playing court. When the guard jumps into position initially, both feet must return to the playing court after the jump, for the guard to attaina guarding position.

The ONLY way I can see this official's interpretation being correct is if he believes "touching the playing court" means the defender has to be in-bounds.

Not sure I buy that one. We're talking about a train wreck here. Foot on the line sounds like a red herring.

Offense, offense, offense, all the way. Team B got robbed.

If this is a "bang-bang" play like most block/charge calls along the endline are, I'm surprised he could see his toe on the line in the first place. Just thinking out loud. That said, it is definitely a charge in this sit.

I'm thinking OOB.
snaqs