Call Decides Harvard-Penn game

[kape]

Thanks for all the responses.

I thought it was the right call, but I didn't expect 100 percent agreement, and I was hoping for more discussion on why it was a no-brainer instead of only that it was a no-brainer, so I could gain insight into one of the tougher calls (to me) in basketball. That seemed like an O.K. reason to post here.

[APG]

It's a no brainer because the defender obtained an initial legal guarding position by virtue of having two feet on the floor and his torso facing the defender, and gaining that LGP before the player with the ball was airborne. Time and distance did not apply because the player had the ball and no time and distance is afforded for him.

[VaTerp]

The "call" did not decide this game. As is almost always the case, the players decided this game.

Instead of focusing on the official who did his job and made the correct, and relatively easy, call; the focus should be on the defender who rotated over to help and made a hell of a defensive play to help secure a W for his team.

[MD Longhorn]

Sometimes the call makes itself. This one is textbook. This one is one we've seen 1000 times in clinics. Thus the fact that no one felt the need to explain it. If a play was created to be an example in the book, this one could be it.

I'm thinking the headline should have been... 20 missed shots including 2-11 from 3, 6 missed free throws and 20 turnovers decide Harvard Penn game. But then that would have been a lot of video to post.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

Unfortunately, that's not really true. Now, it may seem like all I ever do is argue with you, and that's not my intent. But in the case of NCAA rules, and the RA, the secondary defender can establish an initial guarding position outside the RA, and if contact occurs in the defender's torso as the defender is retreating, it would still be a charge.

But the effort was certainly appreciated.

I was really only joking in reference to the other recent topic about a defender moving back relative to LGP.....but twisted to "RA" just for kicks.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by kape

Thanks for all the responses.

I thought it was the right call, but I didn't expect 100 percent agreement, and I was hoping for more discussion on why it was a no-brainer instead of only that it was a no-brainer, so I could gain insight into one of the tougher calls (to me) in basketball. That seemed like an O.K. reason to post here.

You'll have to forgive us; it's like Pavlov's bells this time of year, and you played all the right notes.

Maybe you could answer a question: why did you think it was close?

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

I was really only joking in reference to the other recent topic about a defender moving back relative to LGP.....but twisted to "RA" just for kicks.

Ok.

And, (as expected): shut up.

[Nevadaref]

As this was a secondary defender who came from the edge of the C's primary while the Lead was watching the first match-up, does anyone else think that the C could certainly have had a whistle on this?

I did look closely at the C and he gets stuck behind a couple of players and has to lean to peek around them, definitely not the best look.

Thankfully, the Lead nailed the call. I was able to pause the video at 19 seconds with the defender in perfect LGP prior to the offensive player leaving the floor or the contact occuring.

[DesMoines]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

sometimes the call makes itself. This one is textbook. This one is one we've seen 1000 times in clinics. Thus the fact that no one felt the need to explain it. If a play was created to be an example in the book, this one could be it.

I'm thinking the headline should have been... 20 missed shots including 2-11 from 3, 6 missed free throws and 20 turnovers decide harvard penn game. But then that would have been a lot of video to post.

+1