College Block/Charge - Has the rule changed ?
 

This season with the institution of the arc near the basket in college basketball, I expected that it would help clean up play somewhat in terms of the block/charge. The reason being that secondary defenders will know they need to establish legal guarding position sooner and further out on the court in order to draw a charge, rather than clogging the middle.

In the past I've been pretty good at knowing which way an official will make such a call. But I must say that as the season has progressed I'm now completely confused as to what a block and what a charge is. Nearly every game I've seen examples where a charge is called despite the fact that the defender is still moving and did not establish legal guarding position. The only common denominator appears to be whether the defender (whether primary or secondary) is outside the arc (in which case it's called a charge regardless of legal guarding position) or not. In other words, it seems that the main factor is not whether the defender has established legal guarding position, but WHERE on the floor he is when contact occurs.

I'm not an official but wanted to check with the professionals on this to see if this was the intention of the new rule or not (I went back to read the NCAA's comments when the rule was enacted and didn't get this impression whatsoever). If it's not the intention, then why are so many calls being made this way ? Is it asking too much for an official to look at BOTH the defender's position on the floor and whether he achieved legal guarding position ?

Just wondering,

Jon

The rule (or how it's supposed to be called) hasn't changed for defenders outside the restricted arc.

Your assumption that a player not be moving to have legal guarding position is perhaps where you're confused. It is not a requirement at all until the shooter is airborne. And even then, it is not that movement is illegal, only movement that carries the defender into the path of the airborne player. If they are already in the airborne player's path, additional movement may still be legal (depending on the direction)

Also, there is no time/distance with regard to when the guard establishes LGP. As long as he establishes LGP before the contact, he's legal at that point. He doesn't have to give the dribbler a step or a second. He just has to get their first.

Personally, outside of the arc, I haven't seen any difference in the way this play is officiated.

Camron, no I'm not confused at all. I said still moving AND didn't establish legal guarding position. To be more narrow (and apparently clear) I should have just said the defender didn't establish legal guarding position. Yet because the defender was outside the arc this seems to be the most important factor in calling a charge. That's the impression I've gotten from the games thus far, anyway.

Jon

When I said 'sooner', I meant that a defender would need to get outside of the arc and establish position, rather than staying inside the arc and waiting for the offensive player to come to him.

It takes additional time for a defender to accomplish this, meaning he has to react and move quicker, which is where the 'sooner' comes into play. Sorry for any confusion.

Jon

What is your understanding of what it takes to get LGP?

Well to be honest where else on the floor to players attempt to try to get a charge on a regular basis? Around the basket is by far the main spot, so yes where they are located has ramifications. And no the rule has not changed other than the consideration for the restricted area. And for the record there was a RA before this year, they just decided to put it on the floor this year.

Peace

My understanding comes from the rule book. Section 35 in particular.

http://www.ncaapublications.com/prod...loads/BR13.pdf

Jon

Didn't answer the question. He didn't ask where you got your understanding; he asked what your understanding was.

That wasn't my question. I asked you you thought it means, not where it is in the book.

And that's what I answered. My understanding is what is written in the rule book.

I provided the link and reference as a courtesy, in case anyone wants to actually read it. I could have copied and pasted the text but I didn't see the point.

Jon

Sorry for the use of the word "comes" but I intended to say that what is in the rule book is what I use as my reference as to what constitutes legal guarding position.

And to get back to my original point, there have been numerous cases this season where defenders who are not in legal guarding position have received favorable charge calls, with no seeming explanation other than they were outside the arc.

Jon

Camron was asking you to put it into your own words, not to quote the rule book.

I'll cut to the chase, he's questioning whether you're understanding is accurate.

If you can't seem to reconcile what you repeatedly see with what you think the rule is, the most likely explanation is that you don't actually understand the rules as you think you do.

That might be true, except for the fact that this has generally not happened before this year, but seems to happen at least once every game I've seen this year. (as I explained earlier)

There's been numerous examples this season where the defender moves sideways into the offensive player, has not set his feet, has not established defensive position etc. and still gets the charging call, whereas in past years these plays were typically ruled blocks.

Jon

Your posts tell us that you have several misconceptions.

LGP is NOT required to draw a charging foul from an offensive player.

A defender can move sideways and still have LGP.

A defender is allowed to move into the path of the offensive player. He simply needs to get to the spot first and before an airborne shooter leaves the floor.

His feet do not have to be set.

Other than the placement of the arc, officiating these types of plays hasn't changed. Officials are not going to get every call right. They didn't last year and they aren't this year. missing one block/charge a game is not unusual, at any level.

Like I wasn't expecting this. The old canard, you aren't a ref so you can't possibly understand the rules.

I'm sure you're right. But then on the other hand there are instances where a block is the correct call where the defender has not established LGP, where a block is called when a defender moves sideways into the path of the offensive player, where the defender moves into the path of the offensive player and where his feet are not set.

Obviously it depends on the exact circumstances, which is something that granted I have not been able to provide, since I haven't taken the time to record and document these things.

But despite that, I still maintain that calls which in past years were blocks seem to more and more be called charges. And the examples I've mentioned were all cases where IMO, a block would have been called in past years.

Certain agree that officials aren't going to get every call right. As to whether the officiating has changed for this particular call, maybe you're right, but that's not been my impression.

Thanks for the response.

Jon

It could be that they were missing the calls last year.
It could be that you're not quite on with your understanding of the plays in question and the applicable rule.
You mention moving sideways; that's allowed with LGP.

Bktballref neither offered nor implied your "old canard."

Let's look at the facts. The rule has not changed. The only thing that has changed is the restricted area is now marked. So, one of two things has happened.

The plays are being called differently this year, possibly because the fact that the area is now marked changes the perception of the officials.
(I would assume there will be statistics available somewhere, regarding the numbers of blocks vs. charges for each year.)

Or, your perception of these calls has changed.

Which is more likely?

He didn't say that at all. He said the CONTENT of your posts shows you don't understand it.
In general, it will be a block if LGP is not obtained. But, moving and having the feet "set" are not required to maintain LGP.

Moving sideways into the path of the offensive player, unless the offensive player is airborne, is generally legal.

You really seem to be stuck on the common misconception that being set and not moving are the requirements for getting a charge. It is a misconception perpetuated by announcers and even coaches, but it is just not true.

The time when those things do become relevant is when the offensive player jumps. The only time the defender is prohibited from moving sideways INTO the path of the offensive player is after that player has jumped. Any other sideways movement is legal.

Having both feet on the floor is only required momentarily when the defender initial gets in the offensive player's path. After that, there are no requirements on the feet at all.


What has changed is the presence of the arc. It has changed both the actions of the players and the calls.

For a long time, many officials, even before the RA was formally instituted, called plays at the basket in a manner similar to having a restricted area arc. The problem was that everyone's range of what was too far under the basket differed....right under, 3 feet, 5 feet....no consistency. A lot of plays were getting called blocks because they were too close and the defender didn't know how far out they had to be because it changed every night. They technically had LGP, but were too deep and many officials would never call a charge on those....two bodies would go down and it would either be a no-call or a block. There were still some charges called when the defenders were a few feet out but it was not predictable.

Now, there is a clear mark. Plays that were no-called or blocks before now may be charges because the refs know exactly how far out is far enough instead of each having their own distance.

What has also changed is that players, knowing where they need to be get a charge, are getting there. The plays are not the same. They're setting up farther out because they have to in order to avoid the automatic block. So, it is not just that the refs are calling it differently, the players are playing differently....in a way where they can get the charge.

At the same time, the powers that be have been demanding that if two bodies go down, there should almost always be a call on one of them. In the past, you had a lot of officials doing the "get up" thing with no call when the contact was not excessive. Most often, those occurred with defender in the vicinity of the basket and the shooter floating into them. That is disappearing. If the defender is there and the shooter knocks them down and also fall, they're probably getting a whistle now. And I think more of those were probably charges than blocks.

Maybe the calls have been incorrect in the past and now there are being called properly? ;)

Camron,

Thanks for the reply. I'll have to review it and compare it to the rule book when I have more time.

FYI, I asked the head NCAA statistician if he has noticed an increase in the number of charges as compared to blocks this season, but unfortunately this is not something he (nor someplace like statsheet) tracks. Does anyone happen to know whether these numbers are available somewhere?

Thanks again,

Jon

Is this wording correct?

Yes.

One such example would be a defender establishing legal screening position on an offensive player.