Justise charge?

[mplagrow]

Top forward flattens defender with dunk, is immediately ejected - Prep Rally - High SchoolBlog - Yahoo! Sports

Watched it a few times. The defender on the block wasn't setting to take a charge, quite frankly he was just standing there not paying attention. I still have a charge, though. Any thoughts on the two technicals? Hard to see what the first was for, but the salute was obvious.

[APG]

[Cobra]

The coach of the team on the far bench is standing on the other side of the division line, on the court. But he looks to be 1 step away from his chair. What a terrible setup.

[deecee]

That was an obvious charge that the defender was trying to take. Don't know about the 2 techs, but one yes.

[Jeremy Hohn]

They stated in the Yahoo article that he stared down the kid he dunked on. Totally not the case if you ask me....the Salute deserved one, the other I think the official wanted to get the same stage time as the dunk!

[BktBallRef]

Don't believe everything you read. My guess is he yelled something he shouldn't have yelled, as he clearly didn't didn't even turn toward the flopper. He cleared yelled something and the L never hesitated.

I got nothing on the play. This isn't a charge. The defender was turning, bailing, and flopping before the shooter ever arrived. And from what I can tell, no official whistled or signaled a foul.

As for the coach standing at the division line, he's required to sit inside the box in order to use the coaching box. Where the chair is on the end of the bench has nothing to do with where the coach is allowed to stand.

[Welpe]

Another thing I noticed is that the trail lacked a closely guarded count.

Why is it that the interesting stuff is coming out of Houston these days?

I'm also wondering what chapter covered this game because all of the chapters I'm familiar with around here wear grey shirts for varsity games.

[Tio]

This is a clean dunk. I have the shooter jumping over the defender with marginal contact on the dunk follow-through.

The techs are hard to agree/disagree with as you cannot hear if he said something or had been a problem earlier in the game. Staring someone down is an awfully tough T to validate if that was indeed the extent of the infraction.

[Adam]

1. What a crappy article. It's like it was written by the shooter's Dad.

2. This camera angle doesn't help, so I'd have to defer to whatever the officials called or didn't call.

3. I'm not one to punish a player who braces for contact, but there's a limit on how much affect he can have and still get a call. If he bails to the point where contact is insignificant, a no-call may be appropriate. Coaches invariably yell at their player to stay in there.

[mplagrow]

Lots of great observations and perspectives here...I hadn't even noticed the actions or inactions of the trail official. On a bang-bang play like that, I could see the no-call, and I agree that that's not the 'easy way out.' That's usually the hard call to make. I concur with those who suggest we don't know what the first T was for other than from what the ignorant writer said. I don't think there was a stare-down, the T whistle came too quick for that, so I wouldn't be surprised if the player said something that the video obviously didn't pick up. We also don't know what occurred prior to either T in the game. Maybe the player had already been warned. It's easy to forget that this was one play taken out of context.