Flop

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

If, however, B3 wasn't squared up and in the path and A1 was going to fly by B3 but the fall puts B3 into A1's path (or landing spot), then B3 never had LGP to start with and it will be a block.


.

This is how I was picturing it...

And I like your explanation of the player not losing LGP status.

I'm convinced.

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

This is how I was picturing it...

And I like your explanation of the player not losing LGP status.

I'm convinced.

Geeze, you're getting easier to convince in your old age.

[Duffman]

Once a player establishes LgP they don't have to maintain it to take a charge. However a player cannot have LGP while on the floor. If a player falls to the floor with no contact and the airborne shooter lands on him I'm calling a block all day long.

[APG]

Originally Posted by Duffman

Once a player establishes LgP they don't have to maintain it to take a charge. However a player cannot have LGP while on the floor. If a player falls to the floor with no contact and the airborne shooter lands on him I'm calling a block all day long.

NFHS rules specifically state that every player is entitled to a space on the floor provided they get there legally. However unlikely, if a defender gets to a spot on while on the floor, first and legally, then by rule if a player is to land on him, it wouldn't be a block. This is different than the NCAA rule if I recall correctly.

[Art N]

Originally Posted by allpurposegamer

nfhs rules specifically state that every player is entitled to a space on the floor provided they get there legally. However unlikely, if a defender gets to a spot on while on the floor, first and legally, then by rule if a player is to land on him, it wouldn't be a block. This is different than the ncaa rule if i recall correctly.

+1

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Duffman

Once a player establishes LgP they don't have to maintain it to take a charge. However a player cannot have LGP while on the floor. If a player falls to the floor with no contact and the airborne shooter lands on him I'm calling a block all day long.

Please read the rules. This demonstrates either a lack of understanding of LGP or simply a miscommunication.

[Art N]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

NFHS rules specifically state that every player is entitled to a space on the floor provided they get there legally. However unlikely, if a defender gets to a spot on while on the floor, first and legally, then by rule if a player is to land on him, it wouldn't be a block. This is different than the NCAA rule if I recall correctly.

Originally Posted by Duffman

Once a player establishes LgP they don't have to maintain it to take a charge. However a player cannot have LGP while on the floor. If a player falls to the floor with no contact and the airborne shooter lands on him I'm calling a block all day long.

Duff, I would respectfully submit that you would be incorrect all day long making that call!

[Adam]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

Geeze, you're getting easier to convince in your old age.

Groupthink works!

[Scrapper1]

We've had this exact conversation pretty recently, and I will repeat my minority opinion. Regardless of whether B1 has LGP before A1 becomes airborne, once A1 becomes airborne, if B1 moves to a new position, B1 is responsible for any contact.

There is no way I'm allowing any player to move into an airborne player's landing spot AFTER that player becomes airborne.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

We've had this exact conversation pretty recently, and I will repeat my minority opinion. Regardless of whether B1 has LGP before A1 becomes airborne, once A1 becomes airborne, if B1 moves to a new position, B1 is responsible for any contact.

There is no way I'm allowing any player to move into an airborne player's landing spot AFTER that player becomes airborne.

Was about to post the same opinion. A1 goes airborne and B1 falls without contact and B1's new position on the floor causes disadvantageous contact to A1 then I'm going with a block.

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Was about to post the same opinion. A1 goes airborne and B1 falls without contact and B1's new position on the floor causes disadvantageous contact to A1 then I'm going with a block.

Maybe we're picturing this differently. If B1 fell away early enough that he is already on the floor, then I don't see how he would have LGP and I think a block is appropriate. If B1 is still falling and the contact is delayed only a second or two, I think we still have a PC foul.

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

There is no way I'm allowing any player to move into an airborne player's landing spot AFTER that player becomes airborne.

So if B1 simply delays the moment that A1 initiates contact because he fell away, a PC foul is changed to a block? In my opinion, if A1 was going to go through B1 anyways, this is still a PC foul.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by Welpe

In my opinion, if A1 was going to go through B1 anyways, this is still a PC foul.

But A1 didn't go through B1. B1 changed his position while A1 was airborne and put A1 at a disadvantage.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

But A1 didn't go through B1. B1 changed his position while A1 was airborne and put A1 at a disadvantage.

Maybe, if A1 would have jumped OVER B1, but I don't see too many players capable of this.

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

But A1 didn't go through B1.

We're picturing the play differently then.