block/charge article

rainmaker · #1 (**permalink**) Sat Sep 02, 2000, 12:21am

I just finished reading the block/charge article on the eReferee "front page." The author keeps talking about the defense giving the dribbler one step of distance. Where does he get that from? It totally contradicts what I've been taught! Which is that you don't have to give the dribbler any time or distance at all. You just have to be at a spot and in legal guarding position before the dribbler gets there, even if that "before" is only a millisecond. Am I wrong about this? I know there won't be any hesitation to correct me if I am!!!

JRutledge · #2 (**permalink**) Sat Sep 02, 2000, 12:39am

You are exactly correct. There is no time and distance required. If what you say is correct about the article, it was completly wrong.

Jim Dixon · #3 (**permalink**) Sat Sep 02, 2000, 02:20pm

Thanks for reading, guys. To be frank, I was hoping this article would generate a little discussion--it has done so on basketball discussion boards for the last 3 years.

Notice what I said:

quote:
"For B1 or any other defender, establishing legal defense on the dribbler means giving one step to allow A1 to stop or alter course. This assumes A1 is moving and not standing still. We also assume that B1 is already out in front of A1, and at the time of setting up in the path of A1 to draw the contact, that B1 is not jumping in at the last instant to prevent A1 from being allowed one step to alter course or stop.

That, guys, is a block. A defender cannot just jump in front of the dribbler. Jumping in that quickly has nothing to do with time and distance. It is just poor defense. If you have an illustrated version of the rules put out by NFHS, look in it for this illustration.

If you referee the defense, you realize that B1 is not legal when he/she does something like that. Thus, a block foul.

Jim Dixon

PAULK1 · #4 (**permalink**) Sat Sep 02, 2000, 08:26pm

I think we are getting confused between obtaining and maintaining a legal guarding position. In obtaining a legal guarding position you must get both feet down and facing the dribbler you can't just jump in front of the dribbler therfore the one step
guideline assists you in determining if the
defender was there in time. That being said to maintain that position after gaining legal
guarding status you may move to maintain your position you need not give time or distance
and you don't even need to have both feet on the floor you just have to get there first. And that is good defense being that you have "obtained" legal guarding position and moved to "maintain" it.

mick · #5 (**permalink**) Sat Sep 02, 2000, 08:49pm

quote:
Originally posted by Jim Dixon:
Thanks for reading, guys. To be frank, I was hoping this article would generate a little discussion--it has done so on basketball discussion boards for the last 3 years.

Notice what I said:

Quote:

"For B1 or any other defender, establishing legal defense on the dribbler means giving one step to allow A1 to stop or alter course. This assumes A1 is moving and not standing still. We also assume that B1 is already out in front of A1, and at the time of setting up in the path of A1 to draw the contact, that B1 is not jumping in at the last instant to prevent A1 from being allowed one step to alter course or stop.

That, guys, is a block. A defender cannot just jump in front of the dribbler. Jumping in that quickly has nothing to do with time and distance. It is just poor defense. If you have an illustrated version of the rules put out by NFHS, look in it for this illustration.

If you referee the defense, you realize that B1 is not legal when he/she does something like that. Thus, a block foul.

Jim Dixon

Jim,
I am confused. You say one step. In your mind, how far is one step? Is it 6'+/-, the step of a running dribbler, or is it 30", the step of a walking dribbler.
mick

rainmaker · #6 (**permalink**) Sun Sep 03, 2000, 01:34am

quote:
Originally posted by Jim Dixon:
Thanks for reading, guys...

Notice what I said:

Quote:

"For B1 or any other defender, establishing legal defense on the dribbler means giving one step to allow A1 to stop or alter course. This assumes A1 is moving and not standing still. We also assume that B1 is already out in front of A1, and at the time of setting up in the path of A1 to draw the contact, that B1 is not jumping in at the last instant to prevent A1 from being allowed one step to alter course or stop.

That, guys, is a block. A defender cannot just jump in front of the dribbler. Jumping in that quickly has nothing to do with time and distance. It is just poor defense. If you have an illustrated version of the rules put out by NFHS, look in it for this illustration.

If you referee the defense, you realize that B1 is not legal when he/she does something like that. Thus, a block foul.

Jim Dixon

Hey, Jim,

Thanks for your careful explanation. I'm going to try to respond carefully, too.

For starters, could you find some other plural to use besides "guys"? Us gals are trying hard to be included in this profession and appreciate all the recognition we can get.

Next. My understanding is that the defender CAN jump in front of the dribbler at the last second, if both feet are on the floor and the torso is facing, before contact occurs. I understand that this takes some time and that it could take about one step by the dribbler for the defender to slide into place, but if the defender can accomplish the task in less time, it's allowed. Isn't it?

Thirdly, I looked at the illustration, and I must admit, I find it a little confusing. He doesn't have both feet on the floor, but he doesn't appear to be in motion, really, except for the lines like smoke from a jet. So I'm not sure what the point is.

I studied the videotapes put out by the NF and also the NCAA tapes our association has and in all of those, several comments were made about "not punishing the defense for good legal moves."

Also, you use the "alter course or stop" language with reference to defending the dribbler, but I have been understanding the book to say that this is not necessary.
Rule Book 4.23.4 says no time or distance is required in guarding a moving opponent with the ball. 4.23.5 says in guarding an opponent WITHOUT the ball, time and distance most be given to allow the opponent to avoid contact.

Okay, now I'm still a rookie so I need to have an open mind here, so I'm hoping you can help me understand better what I seem to be missing at the moment.

Thanks!! Great discussion topic!!

[This message has been edited by rainmaker (edited September 03, 2000).]

JRutledge · #7 (**permalink**) Sun Sep 03, 2000, 11:00am

That just is not right. Once a player has established position on the floor, that player can then move sideways and backwards and be in legal guarding position to take an offensive foul on the dribbler. Even if a player jumps over and touches the floor right before a dribbler runs him over, it is still an offensive foul. And a defender once establishing legal guarding position, a player can even jump as long as they stay in their vertical plane. What rulebook are you reading you logic from?

quote:
Originally posted by Jim Dixon:
Thanks for reading, guys. To be frank, I was hoping this article would generate a little discussion--it has done so on basketball discussion boards for the last 3 years.

Notice what I said:

Quote:

"For B1 or any other defender, establishing legal defense on the dribbler means giving one step to allow A1 to stop or alter course. This assumes A1 is moving and not standing still. We also assume that B1 is already out in front of A1, and at the time of setting up in the path of A1 to draw the contact, that B1 is not jumping in at the last instant to prevent A1 from being allowed one step to alter course or stop.

That, guys, is a block. A defender cannot just jump in front of the dribbler. Jumping in that quickly has nothing to do with time and distance. It is just poor defense. If you have an illustrated version of the rules put out by NFHS, look in it for this illustration.

If you referee the defense, you realize that B1 is not legal when he/she does something like that. Thus, a block foul.

Jim Dixon

hoopsrefBC · #8 (**permalink**) Sun Sep 03, 2000, 03:11pm

HEY, JRUTLEDGE AND I CAN AGREE !!!

LOCATE WHERE THE CONTACT OCCURS ON THE TORSO. REF THE 'D'.

keep smiling

sh

Jim Dixon · #9 (**permalink**) Sun Sep 03, 2000, 04:58pm

quote:
Originally posted by PAULK1:
I think we are getting confused between obtaining and maintaining a legal guarding position. In obtaining a legal guarding position you must get both feet down and facing the dribbler you can't just jump in front of the dribbler therefore the one step guideline assists you in determining if the defender was there in time. That being said to maintain that position after gaining legal guarding status you may move to maintain your position you need not give time or distance and you don't even need to have both feet on the floor you just have to get there first. And that is good defense being that you have "obtained" legal guarding position and moved to "maintain" it.

Paul has it. Thus: . . . to maintain that position after gaining legal guarding status [position] you may move to maintain your position [and] you need not give time or distance and you don't even need to have both feet on the floor you just have to get there first.

I quote him to avoid repeating too much of my article. I am talking about establishing legal defense on the dribbler, which means giving one step to allow A1 to stop or alter course. That is a basic fundamental of officiating. Grasp that and THEN go on to the rest of the article.

Jim

[This message has been edited by Jim Dixon (edited September 03, 2000).]

BktBallRef · #10 (**permalink**) Sun Sep 03, 2000, 05:13pm

Think about what Jim is saying guys and visualize the play.

If the defender and the dribbler are both moving, then the defender is not going to be able to get in front of the dribbler if he is only one step away. It's that simple. If the defender gets to the spot first, then obviously, the dribbler was more than a step away. If he doesn't get there first, then he stepped in after the dribbler got to the spot.

Jim isn't quoting a rule. He's describing how the play develops. We're talking about two players who are moving.

[This message has been edited by BktBallRef (edited September 03, 2000).]

JRutledge · #11 (**permalink**) Sun Sep 03, 2000, 09:08pm

But that explanation confuses what the rule says. It clearly states that no time and distance are necessary. What if a player just moved sideways and the dribbler runs the defender over it is a player-control foul, period. What does that have to do with anything else. I am not trying to be an a-hole, I just do not understand how he came up with that logic.

quote:
Originally posted by BktBallRef:
Think about what Jim is saying guys and visualize the play.

If the defender and the dribbler are both moving, then the defender is not going to be able to get in front of the dribbler if he is only one step away. It's that simple. If the defender gets to the spot first, then obviously, the dribbler was more than a step away. If he doesn't get there first, then he stepped in after the dribbler got to the spot.

Jim isn't quoting a rule. He's describing how the play develops. We're talking about two players who are moving.

[This message has been edited by BktBallRef (edited September 03, 2000).]

rainmaker · #12 (**permalink**) Mon Sep 04, 2000, 03:42pm

quote:
Originally posted by Jim Dixon:
Paul has it. Thus: . . . to maintain that position after gaining legal guarding status [position] you may move to maintain your position [and] you need not give time or distance and you don't even need to have both feet on the floor you just have to get there first.

I quote him to avoid repeating too much of my article. I am talking about establishing legal defense on the dribbler, which means giving one step to allow A1 to stop or alter course. That is a basic fundamental of officiating. Grasp that and THEN go on to the rest of the article.

Okay, Jim, I'll keep following along here and try to grasp this fundamental. What I think we're working on here is the definition of establishing legal guarding position. Is that correct? Are you saying that in order to establish legal guarding position, the defender must allow the dribbler one step to change or alter course? Could you please give a rule book or case book reference so I can get the full context? Thanks.

[This message has been edited by rainmaker (edited September 04, 2000).]

rainmaker · #13 (**permalink**) Mon Sep 04, 2000, 03:56pm

Sorry, somehow I couldn't edit this question into my last post.

What about what BkBallRef said about describing how the play develops? Are you saying that as a general guideline the defender should allow the dribbler one step to alter course, because he just physically can't get into legal guarding position any faster than that? Keep talking to me here I really need to understand this concept!

JRutledge · #14 (**permalink**) Mon Sep 04, 2000, 05:38pm

I am not really sure if you are asking me or not, but I do not see why you would not allow a defender to step in front of a dribbler less than a step. The rule is very clear about this and if you really think about it, you probably could not call it any other way if you use the rule and ref the defense. But that is just my opinion.

quote:
Originally posted by rainmaker:
Sorry, somehow I couldn't edit this question into my last post.

What about what BkBallRef said about describing how the play develops? Are you saying that as a general guideline the defender should allow the dribbler one step to alter course, because he just physically can't get into legal guarding position any faster than that? Keep talking to me here I really need to understand this concept!

[This message has been edited by JRutledge (edited September 04, 2000).]

mick · #15 (**permalink**) Mon Sep 04, 2000, 07:59pm

quote:
Originally posted by JRutledge:
I am not really sure if you are asking me or not, but I do not see why you would not allow a defender to give the dribbler a step. The rule is very clear about this and if you really think about it, you probably could not call it any other way if you use the rule and ref the defense. But that is just my opinion.

Rut,
You lost me.
mick