You Make The Call

[tref]

Originally Posted by Brad

If you have a call, it should be a block. If you have a no call, I could live with that as well.

Calling a PC on this is horrible.

The offensive player doesn't make any contact with the chest. He barely makes contact at all -- the defensive player's right arm touches the offensive players hip and then the defensive player flops to the floor.

This isn't even close. If you think it is, go full screen on YouTube so that you can get a better look!

Absofreakinglutely, call it like it is Brad!

An important factor that hasn't been brought up is the team officiating concept. I think its safe to say that 80% of us say its not a p/c. The more important piece would be "why" was it ruled incorrectly??
I know in different parts of the country we have different philosophies on who gets first crack at block/charge plays. But staying connected to SDF plays that go to the rim at T/C would permit a great opportunity for a double whistle in this sitch! Would've been nice to see the T pop & maybe the two officials could've communicated & came out with the right call.

It all boils down to a detailed pregame... a flop is a block tonight, 2 opponents going down in the paint after the shot & before the shooter lands needs a whistle, double whistles on 2ndary defenders go to the L, etc.

Being likeminded is crucial here, perhaps the T was passing on the flop/block & the L has bodies on the floor in the paint so he feels obligated to put a whistle on it. IMO, the L never really picked up the 2ndary defender & goes with a p/c.

NoFear: There comes a time when we have to say we were wrong, learn from it & move on. You've been provided with ample rules & caseplays to support the difference between, when LGP must be obtained vs. continuous motion.

[Brick43]

On first view I had a block or a no call. (I am infamous for the no call on marginal contact). Then with instant replay slowing down the play I can see the defender is planted and not moving so I think Charge. Then I re-watch the play one more time to see if the defender was set prior to the shooter leaving the floor and I see he was not. So I am back to my original block or no call. Moral of the story.... Replay really gets in the way of calling a game and oh yeah stick to your original instincts.....

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by tref

...Being likeminded is crucial here, perhaps the T was passing on the flop/block & the L has bodies on the floor in the paint so he feels obligated to put a whistle on it. IMO, the L never really picked up the 2ndary defender & goes with a p/c.
...

This was the Lead's call. No way the T can pick up the secondary defender (B2) on this play. T has A1 being contesting by B1 on the drive and then B2 shows up right in front of the Lead. The Lead rightfully had the only whistle on this play, just unfortunate that replays shows he probably got it wrong.

[BLydic]

Originally Posted by tref

It all boils down to a detailed pregame... a flop is a block tonight, 2 opponents going down in the paint after the shot & before the shooter lands needs a whistle, double whistles on 2ndary defenders go to the L, etc.

Being likeminded is crucial here, perhaps the T was passing on the flop/block & the L has bodies on the floor in the paint so he feels obligated to put a whistle on it. IMO, the L never really picked up the 2ndary defender & goes with a p/c.

Same point BNR made.

I'm also in strong agreement that plays like this need to be part of the crews pregame, good point.

[tref]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

This was the Lead's call. No way the T can pick up the secondary defender (B2) on this play. T has A1 being contesting by B1 on the drive and then B2 shows up right in front of the Lead. The Lead rightfully had the only whistle on this play, just unfortunate that replays shows he probably got it wrong.

So what happened to staying connected to plays that originate in your PCA?

Isn't the primary function of the T to be refereeing the ball handler & defender while seeing as many of the other 8 players as possible?

I understand that some officials choose to give L 1st crack at it, but there's nothing wrong with doubling down in proper cadence, especially when we see the L is about to get it wrong. I think the official who saw the start of the play, then saw it develop towards the rim & saw the finish of the play has a better chance of getting it right than the official who catches the a$$-end of the play.

In a perfect world, after the L pops & before he punches: T *tweet tweet - tweet tweet* Get together for less than 7 seconds, score it, block, 1 shot.
L buys the beer!

Say for instance we have the same play but it comes from the Cs side. The 2ndary defender is on the other side of the lane line & the L didnt get a chance to rotate. That C had better be able to pick up the defender if we dont want the L calling across paint!

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by tref

So what happened to staying connected to plays that originate in your PCA?

Isn't the primary function of the T to be refereeing the ball handler & defender while seeing as many of the other 8 players as possible?

I understand that some officials choose to give L 1st crack at it, but there's nothing wrong with doubling down in proper cadence, especially when we see the L is about to get it wrong. I think the official who saw the start of the play, then saw it develop towards the rim & saw the finish of the play has a better chance of getting it right than the official who catches the a$$-end of the play.

In a perfect world, after the L pops & before he punches: T *tweet tweet - tweet tweet* Get together for less than 7 seconds, score it, block, 1 shot.
L buys the beer!

Look at the play again. The Trail initially did not follow the play down so he was out of position. And even if he did follow the play he would not have seen the secondary defender move into place because A1 & B1 would have blocked his view.

Originally Posted by tref

Say for instance we have the same play but it comes from the Cs side. The 2ndary defender is on the other side of the lane line & the L didnt get a chance to rotate. That C had better be able to pick up the defender if we dont want the L calling across paint!

Hopefully the Lead would have at least closed down so he would have still had a good look. But regardless if the play would have originated from the C's PCA he would have been at the free throw line extended when the play started, not at half court. So he would have had been below the play the play and had a clean look at any secondary defenders coming into his viewing area.

[tref]

Cool, we agree... somewhat

The T needs to stay connected here! But If the C should position themselves to pick up 2ndary defenders, so should the T. Not saying to guess, if you dont see it, then you don't see it! But at the rate the game is progressing, the good officiail must be able to multi-task.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by tref

Cool, we agree... somewhat

The T needs to stay connected here! But If the C should position themselves to pick up 2ndary defenders, so should the T. Not saying to guess, if you dont see it, then you don't see it! But at the rate the game is progressing, the good officiail must be able to multi-task.

I don't see how the T can position himself to see a secondary defender on this play. He has the play from half court, his first priority is to see between the defender and ball-handler, which he may still have done when he was out of camera shot. The T stays connected by refereeing B1 on this play. The Lead stays connected by picking up the secondary defender.

The C would have been set up at the free throw line looking back at the play. His peripheral would allow him to pick up a secondary defender coming from the paint.

You cannot compare the T and C on this play.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by NoFear2020

By that time (:11) B1 facing A1 with both feet on the floor he is late, he did not met the requirements under rule 4-23-2
At :02 B1 is just in the lane, and by the time :11 A1 had already started his shot. BLOCK on B1

Again the applicable rule is 4-23-4b. Also, you stated he never obtained LGP, when in fact he did. He got it, at the latest, right before A1 took off. His problem is that LGP does not allow him to lean sideways into contact, which he did, thus earning the block. Had he not leaned and still been run over, the timing was in his favor.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Brick43

On first view I had a block or a no call. (I am infamous for the no call on marginal contact). Then with instant replay slowing down the play I can see the defender is planted and not moving so I think Charge. Then I re-watch the play one more time to see if the defender was set prior to the shooter leaving the floor and I see he was not. So I am back to my original block or no call. Moral of the story.... Replay really gets in the way of calling a game and oh yeah stick to your original instincts.....

He does not need to be set. Please get that word out of your vocabulary. He needs LGP, which he had. A player need not ever be stationary to obtain LGP. He just can't lean like he did.

[tref]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

I don't see how the T can position himself to see a secondary defender on this play. He has the play from half court, his first priority is to see between the defender and ball-handler, which he may still have done when he was out of camera shot. The T stays connected by refereeing B1 on this play. The Lead stays connected by picking up the secondary defender.

As I look a bit closer at this play & in defense of the T, the 2ndary defender is coming over at the same time that the initial defender gets beat... you're right, tough play for the T (only because he got stuck in the mud & didnt position adjust by taking a mere 3-4 steps down).

On the other hand, if B2 senses the defender will be beat (his reason for coming to help B1) shouldn't the T be thinking the same thing, if not a step ahead of the young player?

[bainsey]

Originally Posted by tref

It all boils down to a detailed pregame... a flop is a block tonight

I don't understand this mentality. Why isn't a flop simply a flop?

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by tref

...
On the other hand, if B2 senses the defender will be beat (his reason for coming to help B1) shouldn't the T be thinking the same thing, if not a step ahead of the young player?

He's depending on his partner to do that. The Trail has to focus on his one-on-one matchup, he needs to keep an angle that allows him to see in between A1 and his primary defender. The Trail is still responsible for any contact that B1 may cause when A1 elevates for his shot.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by bainsey

I don't understand this mentality. Why isn't a flop simply a flop?

Yep. There's nothing illegal about a player falling backwards to absorb contact.

[tref]

Originally Posted by bainsey

I don't understand this mentality. Why isn't a flop simply a flop?

When a flop doesnt result in any contact whatsoever, it obviously cannot be a block.

When a flop causes the airborne shooter to hit the deck, in order to do our job & protect the shooter, to me, its gotta be a block.

When 2 bodies are down & the defender laid down causing the shooter to go down... BLOCK.

In my experiences, calling a flop a block keeps players from flopping.
I've even heard coaches say to their players, "Play D & stay on your feet, they arent going for it tonight!"

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Yep. There's nothing illegal about a player falling backwards to absorb contact.

Yep. They may also turn or duck when contact is immenent.
The bolded part is not only part of that rule, it is also missing from this equation. Sorta like the word intentional in a kicking violation.