Charge???

[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.

[berserkBBK]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

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.

Agreed. Playing this in my head, a player that is just on the ground and gets jumped on will get a whistle in his favor from me. Pretty weird play that I have not had yet

[Adam]

Originally Posted by berserkBBK

Agreed. Playing this in my head, a player that is just on the ground and gets jumped on will get a whistle in his favor from me. Pretty weird play that I have not had yet

Yeah, players are intuitive enough to get out of the way.

[Duffman]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Yeah, players are intuitive enough to get out of the way.

Agreed, but I work a lot of 1A and 2A girls ball, and even at the varsity level it seems there are one or two girls on the floor at all times for various reasons. I encounter contact with a player on the floor serval times a season so it does come up. I'm curious on your view changes is a situation in which...

A1 is an airborn shooter and comes into contact with, and is put at a disadvantage by, B1 who is getting up off the floor after ending up there for God knows what reason. We don't have a legal guarding position, and the player isn't stationary despite remaining in the general space on the floor they occupy. Would you then have a block?

[7IronRef]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

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.

But in the play the defender flopped (according to some) and had taken himself out of the play and is already no longer participating in normal movement.

[Duffman]

Originally Posted by 7IronRef

But in the play the defender flopped (according to some) and had taken himself out of the play and is already no longer participating in normal movement.

That seems to be the source of the division.

In my view if a B1 flops to try and draw a call and while on the floor causes a disadvantage to A(1-5) then I'm likely to call B1 for a foul as the floor isn't a LGP and it's his own damn fault he's on the floor.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Duffman

That seems to be the source of the division.

In my view if a B1 flops to try and draw a call and while on the floor causes a disadvantage to A(1-5) then I'm likely to call B1 for a foul as the floor isn't a LGP and it's his own damn fault he's on the floor.

My biggest issue here is the continued reference to LGP for a stationary player. LGP isn't required for 4-23-1 "Every player is entitled to a spot on the floor provided such player gets there first without illegally contacting an opponent."

[7IronRef]

Originally Posted by Duffman

That seems to be the source of the division.

In my view if a B1 flops to try and draw a call and while on the floor causes a disadvantage to A(1-5) then I'm likely to call B1 for a foul as the floor isn't a LGP and it's his own damn fault he's on the floor.

Agreed

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Duffman

Agreed, but I work a lot of 1A and 2A girls ball, and even at the varsity level it seems there are one or two girls on the floor at all times for various reasons. I encounter contact with a player on the floor serval times a season so it does come up. I'm curious on your view changes is a situation in which...

A1 is an airborn shooter and comes into contact with, and is put at a disadvantage by, B1 who is getting up off the floor after ending up there for God knows what reason. We don't have a legal guarding position, and the player isn't stationary despite remaining in the general space on the floor they occupy. Would you then have a block?

Probably. I was about to make an argument that the player has not lost LGP, but I'm not sure what I think about that yet. (what has a player on the floor done to lose LGP?) If a player without LGP is rising into a defender, it's likely a block. But, that said, that's only if the contact wouldn't have happened without the attempt to get up. If A1 is landing on B1 regardless, it's a charge.

Originally Posted by 7IronRef

But in the play the defender flopped (according to some) and had taken himself out of the play and is already no longer participating in normal movement.

If you think the player tried to fake a foul, warn or call the T. Otherwise, he got to the floor legally.