Rsbq

[tref]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Heaven forbid....

Oh my, you dont like that either? Snaqs it's really a beautiful thing!
Just like RSBQ & SDF, the RA takes the art out of our thought process & makes it more of a science.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by tref

Oh my, you dont like that either? Snaqs it's really a beautiful thing!
Just like RSBQ & SDF, the RA takes the art out of our though process & makes it more of a science.

I disagree. The criteria for this are pretty clear. While there's an art to officiating, that applies more to game management and when to make certain calls (like letting a few travels go to benefit a team losing by 50). It doesn't apply to B/C calls. That's about knowing how to identify LGP.

[tref]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

It doesn't apply to B/C calls. That's about knowing how to identify LGP.

I respect your stance, but when a 2ndary defenders foot is in the RA there is no need to know LGP. Thats beautiful, IMHO!

[Adam]

Originally Posted by tref

I respect your stance, but when a 2ndary defenders foot is in the RA there is no need to know LGP. Thats beautiful, IMHO!

It might make it easier in this instance, but I don't like the idea of taking away this defensive tactic. I know some (you included) think it's not a legitimate tactic, but I think it's a fair strategy to take away the shooter's path to force him to take a different shot than he wants.

Besides, then you have to learn to identify secondary vs primary defenders as well as other aspects of the rule that determine whether it applies.

[APG]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

I know some (you included) think it's not a legitimate tactic, but I think it's a fair strategy to take away the shooter's path to force him to take a different shot than he wants.

Besides, then you have to learn to identify secondary vs primary defenders as well as other aspects of the rule that determine whether it applies.

I'd go to say that most don't feel like it's a legitimate tactic...at least in the eyes of the rules makers. NFHS is the only major level not to have an RA now (NBA, NCAA, and FIBA).

And we kind of already should know the difference between primary and secondary defenders...especially on block/charge plays to the basic and working in 3-man mechanics.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

I'd go to say that most don't feel like it's a legitimate tactic...at least in the eyes of the rules makers. NFHS is the only major level not to have an RA now (NBA, NCAA, and FIBA).

And we kind of already should know the difference between primary and secondary defenders...especially on block/charge plays to the basic and working in 3-man mechanics.

The stated reason NCAAW adopted the RA was NOT "because it's not a valid defensive tactic" but "to increase scoring". So, I'd say they thought it was "too good" of a defensive tactic.

[APG]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

The stated reason NCAAW adopted the RA was NOT "because it's not a valid defensive tactic" but "to increase scoring". So, I'd say they thought it was "too good" of a defensive tactic.

Well I stand corrected with regard to NCAA-W. At every other level, I've read/heard that either formally or informally, many felt that standing right near the basket wasn't "legitimate" defense...and why part of the rule states that defenders are allowed to jump up, in an attempt to block the ball, whilst in the RA since that is seen as playing "legitimate" defense.

[tref]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

The stated reason NCAAW adopted the RA was NOT "because it's not a valid defensive tactic" but "to increase scoring". So, I'd say they thought it was "too good" of a defensive tactic.

Whatever the reason is, how many people are buying tickets to see the p/c call or good defense?
People are coming out to basketball games to see the scoring, particularly the high flying dunks.
Defenders taking charges at the rack is quite dangerous to airborne athletes.

If I didnt want to see points scored when I'm working, I could just go do baseball

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

The stated reason NCAAW adopted the RA was NOT "because it's not a valid defensive tactic" but "to increase scoring". So, I'd say they thought it was "too good" of a defensive tactic.

The NCAA reason for adopting the RA proves that the people who adopted it do not have a clue as to the rules of basketball concerning LGP.

MTD, Sr.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

It might make it easier in this instance, but I don't like the idea of taking away this defensive tactic. I know some (you included) think it's not a legitimate tactic, but I think it's a fair strategy to take away the shooter's path to force him to take a different shot than he wants.

Besides, then you have to learn to identify secondary vs primary defenders as well as other aspects of the rule that determine whether it applies.

Snaqs:

I agree with you 100%.

MTD, Sr.

[bainsey]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Besides, then you have to learn to identify secondary vs primary defenders as well as other aspects of the rule that determine whether it applies.

There it is.

When you consider the pools of college vs. high school officials -- and their corresponding experience -- I think you're going to find it much tougher for high school officials to identify a secondary defender, especially considering there is no such definition.

I still don't see the point of the RA, anyway. If you obtain LGP after the shooter leaves the floor, by rule, it's a block.

[APG]

Originally Posted by bainsey

There it is.

When you consider the pools of college vs. high school officials -- and their corresponding experience -- I think you're going to find it much tougher for high school officials to identify a secondary defender, especially considering there is no such definition.

I still don't see the point of the RA, anyway. If you obtain LGP after the shooter leaves the floor, by rule, it's a block.

If you're the off ball official, especially in 3-man, you're already identifying primary and secondary defenders...especially when dealing with block/charge plays and who takes the play in cases of double whistle...at the high school level (in fact at all levels).

And I'm quite sure if/when the rule is ever implemented, NFHS will define primary and secondary defenders.

[tref]

I think you guys are putting too much into something you already unknowingly do.

You're T & A1 shakes B1 & gets by him on a drive to the rack...

Are you still looking at B1 or do you find the next guy that could hurt you??
-----------------------------------------------

You're the L & A1 shakes B1 & gets by him on a drive to the rack from the Cs area...

Aren't you in the paint identifying that next defender??



We should be picking up 2ndary defenders at any level we currently work.

[reffish]

Originally Posted by tref

I think you guys are putting too much into something you already unknowingly do.

You're T & A1 shakes B1 & gets by him on a drive to the rack...

Are you still looking at B1 or do you find the next guy that could hurt you??
-----------------------------------------------

You're the L & A1 shakes B1 & gets by him on a drive to the rack from the Cs area...

Aren't you in the paint identifying that next defender??


We should be picking up 2ndary defenders at any level we currently work.

tref,
Great questions. If I was T, I would stay with my defender (B1) and (this would be part of our pre-game) and let L get secondary defender. If I am able, try to pick up secondary defenders as T, but the crew is putting the responsibility on L for the secondary defenders.
The second one, I hope that I am rotated (given the time that A1 was able to shake B1), but if not, yes, secondary defenders with primary whistle from the L, secondary whistle from C and T.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by bainsey

There it is.

When you consider the pools of college vs. high school officials -- and their corresponding experience -- I think you're going to find it much tougher for high school officials to identify a secondary defender, especially considering there is no such definition.

I still don't see the point of the RA, anyway. If you obtain LGP after the shooter leaves the floor, by rule, it's a block.

Except there's a definition of secondary defender in the NCAA rulebook. Could easily be copied into the NFHS rulebook if they wanted to.

I'm not a fan of B1 putting himself in A1's landing spot. To me, it's dangerous and B1 could've just as easily stepped up and established LGP in many circumstances.

I like the RA, but I don't think it's a no brainer to call in some circumstances.