Charge???

[Duffman]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Changing positions in relation to the floor. Rolling, trying to get up, stretching out the arms or legs, etc.

What Do You Have

Intereresting the difference between NCAA and NHSF here, thanks for pointing that out.

In the situation on the video I'd have a foul under both NCAA (which I do tiny bit of JV stuff) and HS as I don't think the defender was motionless.

In the rare instance in which a player on the floor was perfectly motionless I'd agree with you that there is no foul, but I'll ask again are we talking about planking here (lying on the floor rigidly with your arms and hands straight at your sides)? I find it hard to imagine a situation in which there was truly no movement by a player lying on the floor. If said player is lying on his/her back on the floor and raises his/her arms verticly to protect him/herself isn't that considered movement? How is that different than a player standing verticly that extends his/her amrs horizontally and creates contact as a player drives by him/her.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Duffman

Intereresting the difference between NCAA and NHSF here, thanks for pointing that out.

In the situation on the video I'd have a foul under both NCAA (which I do tiny bit of JV stuff) and HS as I don't think the defender was motionless.

In the rare instance in which a player on the floor was perfectly motionless I'd agree with you that there is no foul, but I'll ask again are we talking about planking here (lying on the floor rigidly with your arms and hands straight at your sides)? I find it hard to imagine a situation in which there was truly no movement by a player lying on the floor. If said player is lying on his/her back on the floor and raises his/her arms verticly to protect him/herself isn't that considered movement? How is that different than a player standing verticly that extends his/her amrs horizontally and creates contact as a player drives by him/her.

I agree with your take on the video. B1 undercuts A1. That said, I'm not going to ask a player to stop breathing to avoid a foul. Essentially, he gets the same movements we'd allow a player on the court without LGP. Entitled to his spot on the playing court, as long as he doesn't do anything to change or extend that spot, he's legal.

[Duffman]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

I agree with your take on the video. B1 undercuts A1. That said, I'm not going to ask a player to stop breathing to avoid a foul. Essentially, he gets the same movements we'd allow a player on the court without LGP. Entitled to his spot on the playing court, as long as he doesn't do anything to change or extend that spot, he's legal.

Fair enough, and interesting debate to be sure.

[7IronRef]

If I am following the point you two are discussing, once the player flops to the floor, that player no longer has LGP (LGP = 2 feet on the floor, facing an opponent).

I agree with Duff, that the player laying on the floor can be charged with a foul.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by 7IronRef

If I am following the point you two are discussing, once the player flops to the floor, that player no longer has LGP (LGP = 2 feet on the floor, facing an opponent).

I agree with Duff, that the player laying on the floor can be charged with a foul.

First of all, 2 feet and facing are not required to maintain LGP; only to establish.

Second of all:
NFHS: Even if he hasn't maintained LGP, he doesn't need it if he's not moving.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by 7IronRef

If I am following the point you two are discussing, once the player flops to the floor, that player no longer has LGP (LGP = 2 feet on the floor, facing an opponent).

I agree with Duff, that the player laying on the floor can be charged with a foul.

If B1 is facing the stands and picking his nose, he also doesn't have LGP. That doesn't mean that if A1 runs into B1, the foul is (automatically) on B1.

[Duffman]

Originally Posted by 7IronRef

If I am following the point you two are discussing, once the player flops to the floor, that player no longer has LGP (LGP = 2 feet on the floor, facing an opponent).

I agree with Duff, that the player laying on the floor can be charged with a foul.

Thanks for taking my side, but to nitpick a player must ESTABLISH a LGP with 2 feet on the floor while facing an opponent, but once it's established a player can maintain a LGP with no feet on the floor (jumping vertically) or even facing a different direction (turning his/her shoulders to protect from an impact on a charge).

Here's a hypothetical.

A1 beats B1 off the dribble and drives to the bucket. A secondary defender B2 steps into the path of A1 and stops without facing A1 (he could be perpendicular or in a box out reboudning position). A1 shots the ball and as an air born shooter lands on B2 (who was stationary prior to the beggining of the attempt). Am I correct to rule this a blocking fould because B2 never established a LGP by facing the opponent?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Duffman

Thanks for taking my side, but to nitpick a player must ESTABLISH a LGP with 2 feet on the floor while facing an opponent, but once it's established a player can maintain a LGP with no feet on the floor (jumping vertically) or even facing a different direction (turning his/her shoulders to protect from an impact on a charge).

Here's a hypothetical.

A1 beats B1 off the dribble and drives to the bucket. A secondary defender B2 steps into the path of A1 and stops without facing A1 (he could be perpendicular or in a box out reboudning position). A1 shots the ball and as an air born shooter lands on B2 (who was stationary prior to the beggining of the attempt). Am I correct to rule this a blocking fould because B2 never established a LGP by facing the opponent?

No.

LGP is not required for 4-23-1

[7IronRef]

Originally Posted by Duffman

Thanks for taking my side, but to nitpick a player must ESTABLISH a LGP with 2 feet on the floor while facing an opponent, but once it's established a player can maintain a LGP with no feet on the floor (jumping vertically) or even facing a different direction (turning his/her shoulders to protect from an impact on a charge).

Here's a hypothetical.

A1 beats B1 off the dribble and drives to the bucket. A secondary defender B2 steps into the path of A1 and stops without facing A1 (he could be perpendicular or in a box out reboudning position). A1 shots the ball and as an air born shooter lands on B2 (who was stationary prior to the beggining of the attempt). Am I correct to rule this a blocking fould because B2 never established a LGP by facing the opponent?

Ok, here's another one.

The defender is laying on the floor, the offense rebounds their own shot in a crowd of people, jumps, shoots, and then lands on the prone defender...are you telling me that this is now consideration for a charge?

Coach: How can that be?
Ref: He took it in the chest, coach
Coach: He was laying on the ground!
Ref: He got there first, estbalished LGP.
Coach: LGP huh? Ok guys, everyone lay on the floor near the basket and let them try to shoot lay ups

Come on now

[Duffman]

Originally Posted by 7IronRef

Ok, here's another one.

The defender is laying on the floor, the offense rebounds their own shot in a crowd of people, jumps, shoots, and then lands on the prone defender...are you telling me that this is now consideration for a charge?

Coach: How can that be?
Ref: He took it in the chest, coach
Coach: He was laying on the ground!
Ref: He got there first, estbalished LGP.
Coach: LGP huh? Ok guys, everyone lay on the floor near the basket and let them try to shoot lay ups

Come on now

Interesting... and bonus points for the laughs.

[Adam]

LGP is not required for a stationary player to draw a charge. Yes, if a shooter lands on a stationary defender's chest, when he's lying on the floor relatively still, I'm calling a charge. Not that difficult, and if the coach wants to be an arse about it (they always do on offensive fouls), we can shoot free throws because I have no problem writing reports at night.

[berserkBBK]

Originally Posted by 7IronRef

Ok, here's another one.

The defender is laying on the floor, the offense rebounds their own shot in a crowd of people, jumps, shoots, and then lands on the prone defender...are you telling me that this is now consideration for a charge?

Coach: How can that be?
Ref: He took it in the chest, coach
Coach: He was laying on the ground!
Ref: He got there first, estbalished LGP.
Coach: LGP huh? Ok guys, everyone lay on the floor near the basket and let them try to shoot lay ups

Come on now

If the player got to his spot before the shooter became airborne then by rule you cannot call a block. However if the the contact of falling on the player did not impede his rhythm, speed, balance, or quickness of being on the ground I would have a no call or Charge. (Again, NFHS)

[Adam]

Originally Posted by berserkBBK

If the player got to his spot before the shooter became airborne then by rule you cannot call a block. However if the the contact of falling on the player did not impede his rhythm, speed, balance, or quickness of being on the ground I would have a no call or Charge. (Again, NFHS)

I only disagree with your last part. I'm not going to let a player land on opponent here without a foul call. That's just dangerous. By landing on the defender, he's preventing him from being able to get up. RSBQ are not rule terms, they are only measuring sticks for deciding whether contact has exceeded the boundaries of incidental. If A1 lands on B1's chest (or back), he is (in my view) preventing B1 from participating in normal offensive or defensive movements.

[7IronRef]

Originally Posted by berserkBBK

If the player got to his spot before the shooter became airborne then by rule you cannot call a block. However if the the contact of falling on the player did not impede his rhythm, speed, balance, or quickness of being on the ground I would have a no call or Charge. (Again, NFHS)

Balance is greatly affected when landing on someone