Charge or Block?

[Dave9819]

A1 drives the lane.

B1 is set and standing on the lane line and is not moving, is vertical, etc, however, is not facing A1's torso.

On the drive, A1 contacts B1's shoulder.

A1 is not hindered and B1 falls to the ground. Since A1 hit B1's shoulder, would that be a charge on A1, Block on B1, or a "no call" (if B1 decided to embelish and go down to the ground)?

Thanks!

[JRutledge]

We have had this discussion before, but I would have a charge. The defender did not do anything wrong. LGP is for a player that has established a legal position and has rights to move. This player did not move, they just stood there. Every player has a right to their position on the floor and nothing gives the ball handler the right to run into any player they like.

Peace

[Dave9819]

To take this a step further - if you believed that B1 "embelished" and was trying to draw the foul - in other words, the contact was not severe enough that it would cause B1 to be displaced, would you go with a no-call or a block on B1?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Dave9819

To take this a step further - if you believed that B1 "embelished" and was trying to draw the foul - in other words, the contact was not severe enough that it would cause B1 to be displaced, would you go with a no-call or a block on B1?

I would try my best to call what the contact created. If the contact did not affect anything, then I got nothing. If the contact really affected the play then I have a call. But if all the defender did was stand there, I cannot see anything I would call on B1 in this case.

Peace

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by Dave9819

A1 drives the lane.

B1 is set and standing on the lane line and is not moving, is vertical, etc, however, is not facing A1's torso.

On the drive, A1 contacts B1's shoulder.

A1 is not hindered and B1 falls to the ground. Since A1 hit B1's shoulder, would that be a charge on A1, Block on B1, or a "no call" (if B1 decided to embelish and go down to the ground)?

Thanks!

Originally Posted by Dave9819

To take this a step further - if you believed that B1 "embelished" and was trying to draw the foul - in other words, the contact was not severe enough that it would cause B1 to be displaced, would you go with a no-call or a block on B1?

Definitely not a block. Ever.

[JetMetFan]

Originally Posted by Dave9819

A1 drives the lane.

B1 is set and standing on the lane line and is not moving, is vertical, etc, however, is not facing A1's torso.

On the drive, A1 contacts B1's shoulder.

A1 is not hindered and B1 falls to the ground. Since A1 hit B1's shoulder, would that be a charge on A1, Block on B1, or a "no call" (if B1 decided to embelish and go down to the ground)?

Thanks!

You're saying B1 took that position but wasn't facing A1? Was B1's back to A1?

[Dave9819]

B1 was to the right of A1 so when A1 ran past B1, there shoulders contacted each other. B1 fell (more so trying to draw the charging call) when A1 contacted B1's shoulder. So, when I said they weren't facing each other, I meant they were not directly in front of each other. I hope that answered your question, JetMetFan.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Dave9819

B1 was to the right of A1 so when A1 ran past B1, there shoulders contacted each other. B1 fell (more so trying to draw the charging call) when A1 contacted B1's shoulder. So, when I said they weren't facing each other, I meant they were not directly in front of each other. I hope that answered your question, JetMetFan.

It is commonly said that if the defender doesn't take it in the chest, it is a block. People are commonly wrong.

All that matters is whether B1 got to whatever position they were in before A1 got to it. If A1 is able to divert and not hit B1 in the chest, B1 shouln't be penalized for A1 being able to redirect. You said B1 was "set", which is not really the proper term, but good enough to describe what you meant.....it was NOT a block.

As for a charge, did the contact knock B1 down, or did B1 fall down. If it knocked B1 down, charge, otherwise it would be a no-call.

Being off-center as you describe means it is less likely that the contact knocked B1 down, but it is not impossible.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by JetMetFan

You're saying B1 took that position but wasn't facing A1? Was B1's back to A1?

Doesn't matter.

[Welpe]

If B1 does not have a legal guarding position (and in this case he doesn't) then screening principles are going to apply. In this case, it is even simpler since B1 is stationary. Every player is entitled to their space on the floor.

If A1 contacts B1, then we need to determine if the contact was enough to disadvantage B1. If it was not, we could pass on a whistle here. It certainly cannot be a block.

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Doesn't matter.

Isn't "legal guarding position" the same as "legal position"? Doesn't that mean the player has to face the opponent?

(Oops, I did say I was done with that, didn't I...)

[Adam]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

Isn't "legal guarding position" the same as "legal position"? Doesn't that mean the player has to face the opponent?

(Oops, I did say I was done with that, didn't I...)

You leave me no choice....

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

You leave me no choice....

Traveling?