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!!!

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

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:

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Geneva">quote:</font><HR>"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.”<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

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

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.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Geneva">quote:</font><HR>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.”<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> 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

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Geneva">quote:</font><HR>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.”<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> 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).]

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?

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Geneva">quote:</font><HR>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.”<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> 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, JRUTLEDGE AND I CAN AGREE !!!

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

keep smiling

sh

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Geneva">quote:</font><HR>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.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

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).]

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).]

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.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Geneva">quote:</font><HR>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).]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Geneva">quote:</font><HR>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.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

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).]

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!

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.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Geneva">quote:</font><HR>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!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>



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

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Geneva">quote:</font><HR>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.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Rut,
You lost me.
mick

No place in the definition of intial guarding position does the phrase one step to change or alter direction, course, etc. occur. NFHS "to obtain intial guarding position the guard must have both feet touching the floor and the front of the guard's torso must be facing the opponent. (4-23-2)". NFHS "Guarding an ooponent with the ball or a stationary opponent without the ball no time or distance is required to obtain an intial guarding position. If the opponent with the ball is airborne, the guard must have obtained legal position before the opponent left the floor. (4-23-4). NCAA "Every player is entitled to a spot on the floor provided such players get there first without illegally contacting an opponent. It is assumed the guard may shift to maintain guarding position in the path of the dribbler provided the guard doesn't charge into the dribbler nor otherwise cause contact as outlined in Rule 10-10. ...to establish intial legal guarding position on the player with the ball, the guard must have both feet touching the floor. If the guard jumps into position initially, both feet must return to the floor after the jump before the guard has established a guarding position. The guard's torso must be facing the opponent. No time and distance are required. If the opponent with the ball is airborne, the guard must have established legal position before the opponent left the floor. (4-19a)". The only place that time and distance are factors are guarding a moving opponent without the ball. Then, and only then, in both NFHS and NCAA, the distance given need not exceed more than two strides and the guard must give the opponent time and distance to avoid contact. I don't know where anyone came up with this one step business. If a guard is quick eneough to jump in front of a moving player, get both feet on the ground and take contact on the torso, the only call that can be made is player control. If an official is so focused on a dribbler and out of nowhere a defender appears in front of the dribbler and that defender meets the above criteria and because it happened so fast the official calls a block, in the words of one of my supervisors, "that official should be arrested because he stole a great defensive play from the defender because the official was so in love with the ball he forgot to ref the defense because he obviously never knew the defender was coming!" Intial guarding position can be established instantaneously when it relates to an opponent with the ball. No where does is one step required when guarding the ball. If the defender gets there first, no matter how fast, reward the defense!!!

Everything that you said is true Walter. I agree with you 100%. But Jim isn't quoting a rule. He's describing how the play develops. 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. We're talking about two players who are moving.

Nowhere in his article did Jim say such a rule exists. You guys are misinterpreting what he said. Maybe he didn't say it very well. But in the time a fast moving dribbler takes a step, a defender is not going to be able to get in front of him, and establish his position if the dribbler is less than one step away. It can't be done. The dribbler will make contact before the defender is set. That's a block.

And that's what he's trying to tell you.

I've gone back and re-read the article. I agree if you take the context of the rule out of the play and visualize the situation he may be correct. I may have gone overboard in stating all the rules but the main point of what I was trying to say is make sure the official sees the entire play by getting the best angle and floor positioning so the call becomes very easy to make. In my opinion, for what that's worth, block/charge is the easiest call in basketball if you know the rule and you maintain good position and angles on the floor no matter how fast the players are moving. Too many people focus on the ball handler and next thing you know there's a crash and people say, "Wow where did he/she come from? Must be a block!" Focusing and locking in on the ball can get you in a whole lot of trouble and that's why there are a lot of people out there who think block/charge is the hardest call to make. For me, with the ever increasing speed and athletic ability of today's players, traveling is the hardest call in basketball. But that's another discussion.

Block charge not often seen
 

I had a call block/charge call last year, at a varsity game, where the only two people in the gym (the two refs) seemed to knew that it was the right call. The offensive player came down on a one on one breakaway layup. The defensive player esablished and stayed in legal guarding position in front of her, as the offensive player drove to the basket. The defensive player slowed down, but never stopped, while the offensive player maintained the same speed. Sure enough, a good collision, right after she picked up her dribble. I've got this nailed, have refereed the defense all the way in, a clear player control. It was a smart play by the defense.

But did we ever hear it from the home coach, who went absolutely ballistic, along with the home crowd...even the away coach had a "I got away with one" look on his face. Most of them think that a defensive player must be stationairy, for player control fouls to occur.

Would you fellow refs stop to explain the rule then, amidst the bedlam, or do it later on, or even post game?

Re: Block charge not often seen
 

Westford,
Similarly happened to me last Friday, both moving and dribbler stumbled sideways into defender. Collision was too much to avoid calling. I called the PC, and I took the heat.
It is impossible to deal with ignorance.
mick

Does everyone accept this? Are you sure you are not penalizing a defender who is able to establish position because he is quicker than the dribbler?

Is it easier to determine that the offensive player is a step or more away from the defender as he starts to establish position or is it easier to determine that the defender is set before the contact occurs?

No. I pay absolutely no attention to distance the defender is from the dribbler. If the defender is there at the collision, it doesn't really matter how they got there or from how far. Once they established that initial position---they are there---it gets easier; as long as they aren't moving <em>into</em> the dribbler when contact occurs, it's a PC or nothing.

Quote:

Originally posted by BktBallRef Is it easier to determine that the offensive player is a step or more away from the defender as he starts to establish position or is it easier to determine that the defender is set before the contact occurs?

When officials revert to almost right paraphrases, they probably get the call right almost all the time. To put a time/distance philosophy into block/charge is to actually change the rule...even if it is subtle. Such a change only serves to penalize the defense and is an easy way to avoid the tough call.

As you can tell, I am very particular about precisely knowing the rules. My problem a few years ago was applying them too literally, calling things that should have been a no-call. Having come beyond that phase of development, I still feel it is critical to know the actual rule in order to not call something that doesn't exist. I see too many calls on phantom rules.

How many times do you see a travel or double dribble called on a fumble? Too many!

How many times do you hear the explanation that it was a block because the defender wasn't set? Too many, since being set is no longer a requirement (it once was, in philosophy if not actual rule).

[Edited by Camron Rust on Oct 4th, 2000 at 03:38 PM]

To reiterate what Camron states, and to avoid confusing the less veteran officials here, I think we need to avoid throwing stuff into rules (or subtle interpretations) that are not part of the rule.

Stating that a defender "just can't" get setup in less than a step is false. You'll have well intentioned officials such as Rainmaker telling coaches they called a block "because B1 didn't give A1 a step to stop or alter course"
There is no such provision in the rule, as others have noted.

The laws of physics say that if B1 is quick enough to get in front of A1 in less than a step, then he got there!!

We have enough coaches & fans quoting "basketball myths" to us referess, we don't need to perpetuate the myths ourselves.

dk

Call it a myth if you would like to but the defender has to establish a guarded position before the dribbler can be called for a PC. No, time and distance are not factors to be considered when deciding whether a player established position or not. But we have to be able to discuss it in terms that it can be understood. While it may not be an absolute that a defender can't be quick enough to establish positon if a fast moving dribbler is less than a step away, there are very few HS players possessing the quickness to establish such position. To allow a player to just jump in front of a player driving to the basket without establishing position is incorrect.

We also have to be professional enough to understand our training and not say stupid things to coaches, no matter how long we've been officiating.

[Edited by BktBallRef on Oct 6th, 2000 at 09:15 AM]

I think we need to make sure that we differentiate between intial guarding position and simply moving to maintain or continue defensive guarding. Especially since there are various levels of officials participating here. To establish initial guarding position, a guard simply needs to have two feet on the ground facing the opponent. If the opponent has the ball, time and distance are not factors when determining whether the guard established the intitial guarding position. Some of us on this thread are simply stating that IF a defender is quick enough to jump in front of a fast moving dribbler and get two feet down facing the dribbler and contact occurs on the torso, it has to be PC. Here's a question from one of my supervisors, if a dribbler is in the backcourt moving toward the frontcourt, and a defender is in the paint of the dribbler's frontcourt looking at the dribbler, has that defender established initial guarding position on the dribbler?

I say yes.

That's the correct answer. He then went on to state that since he/she already met the requirements and established the initial guarding position, as long as he/she takes contact on the torso and is not moving into the dribbler when contact occurs, it can be nothing but PC!