As Reqested From Fiasco
 

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/alD5emAgKIU" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Don't know if I agree with Teddy V on this one. I even think the contact occurred after A1 landed.

It is certainly close. I can go along with the call if I have to judge by slow motion to determine.

Peace

I'm happy with a block call.

I can see why he's called TV Ted. :cool:

I've got a charge, but it's close enough. I try to go PC when it's this close.

Really wish the Lead would have had a whistle. Teddy had to look through around a defender and through the back of A1. I think he came in b/c the Lead didn't have anything. And the Trail is very far away and probably would have had the best "unstacked" look had he closed down.

Seems to me the lead should have been on the other side on this one. He would have had the perfect angle on it if he had.

Teddy rotated high, in essence making himself a second trail, when he had a perfectly good look at the play at the center position.

I also didn't like Teddy's theatrics on the play. The way he closed down on the play, you would have thought something other than a basketball play happened.

Looks to me like the L starts to go, then sees it's a drive and stays in a really bad spot. He's looking at nothing but the defender's back and has no angle on this play. So while it "should have been " L's call since it was a secondary defender, he effectively took himself out of the play. Pinching the paint can be a wonderful thing at times.

TV Ted
 

First, I have a block. Had to stop the slo-mo to get it but the defender's left foot was still moving into place while the shooter was airborne.

Second, I don't have a problem with the way Ted came in. Since he was basically in a second T position he really did have to sell this one because he was about 25 feet away from the crash. If he was in the true C position it wouldn't have been necessary.

Third, I don't have a problem with Ted making the call. In women's three-person they'd have our head for making that call across the lane and for years I've wondered why it seems to be okay in men's three-person. The L was straight-lined. He might have been able to determine LGP but there's no way he would've been able to determine whether there was contact.

My 2 cents or 95%.
 

I think that we can all agree that this play is a great example of a BANG-BANG play.

I have always been a firm believer that if one calls a Charge everytime on a BANG-BANG block-charge play, then one will be correct at least 95% of the time. This play is one of the 5% plays. That said, I called a charged the first time I saw it in real time because the defender obtained his position after the offensive player went airborne; it was close, very close, but I still had a block.

MTD, Sr.

The question is not whether his foot was moving, it is whether his body was moving.

Actually it's his feet...

NCAA 4-35-4
To establish an initial legal guarding position on the player with the ball:
a. The guard shall have both feet touching the playing court. When the guard jumps into position initially, both feet must return to the playing court after the jump, for the guard to attain a legal guarding position.
b. The guard’s torso shall face the opponent.
c. No time and distance shall be required.
d. When the opponent with the ball is airborne, the guard shall have attained legal guarding position before the opponent left the playing court.

Actually, it is not.

Read the rest of the rule. Two feet on the court is a momentary requirement, not a static requirement. Once two feet were down with the defender in the path (they were down long before the final position was achieve and well before the contact), they no longer have to be on the floor. The foul was because the defender was moving forward after they could no longer legally do so.

I also body seem to only be a factor if the player is not vertical towards the ball handler. In other words leaning toward the ball handler in a way that it does not allow the space of the opponent.

Peace

Please note:English is the preferred language on this board!:eek:

I beg to differ.

His right foot was down but his left foot was still moving into position as the shooter went airborne. Also, he couldn't have attained LGP until he was out of the RA since he was a secondary defender so the position of his feet on his final two steps matters even more.

In terms of his body, he satified part B of the rule since his torso was facing A1 as he tried to establish. It's parts A and D where he missed.

Yeah, just noticed. Teddy stacked himself when A1 first received the pass. Based on the training I've been getting I know I would have stepped down initially.

Ibelieve this is Teddy's call. The drive originated from his primary and he stayed with it. I also think it was the right call.

It came from his primary but the contact was on a secondary defender, thus I believe the L needs to have a whistle here.

This is a good video to discuss mechanics.

After watching the video a few times in full screen, that's how I'm seeing it as well. If this is Fed, I think perhaps the lack of an RA would give him initial LGP but I still had him moving forward as the shooter went up. At any rate, a good call I think.

Thanks for that tidbit.

rocky, one comment you made about pinching the paint. Isn't the L doing just that or am I misunderstanding some how?

Another perspective
 

I see what APG is saying, but wouldn't the *best* outcome here be the L rotating over as soon as the player put the ball on the floor? He seemed to have more than enough time to do so.

And if the L didn't rotate, wouldn't this be the perfect time to pinch the paint a bit more since the drive came from the other side?

(I know that if I see my C step out like that to cover this as a "T", I'm coming across to make him the actual T. Someone tell me why that wouldn't be the right reaction by the L. Seems to me that the T, because of the matchup, is initiating a rotation -- I have no problem with that, but as an L, I have to get over there.)

To me, he's closed down, but not pinching the paint. That's my understanding, anyway.

I agree about the Lead. He has to notice that Teddy went high on A1's catch and he should have come over with a very accelerated pace. He would have gotten there in time to have a perfect look at B2 before the crash.

Either closed down or pinching, the Lead still would have been straight-lined and not be able to see the contact between A1 and B2.

The crew just didn't put itself in a good position to ref this play.

I have a supervisor who really preaches hard about the C stepping down on this play in particular.

OK, I guess I am misunderstanding then. How would pinching the paint look compared to this?

Yep snaqs that was what I was thinking. He was moving his foot after he got to the spot but he was definately in the path of the ballhandler and not moving forward after the player went airborne. So I have a charge on that end and then it looks like the contact occurs after the ball handler lands. It's close but I got a charge on that end as well.

That's how I saw the play but I fully understand those who think B2 wasn't legal. Though Teddy may be right on the call, b/c he was stacked it feels like he was guessing. Pure speculation on my part, but from his angle I think he could see B2's left foot moving because it was outside A1's body, and he judged that B2 was still moving into position after A1 went airborne.

Agreed, initially thought PC but after 8-9 plays and stop action.......good call IMO. Still moving over as shooter alights

If it's close enough that I have to go to that much trouble to see it was a block, I'd like to think I'd go PC.

He would actually be in the key (oob, of course). You know, that area where we were always told to never ref from? If he steps one big step into the key extended, he might have been able to get an angle on the secondary defender.

Not sure where you are working Women's 3 person mechanics, but around here they would have our heads for NOT having a whistle on this play from Lead as it was a secondary defender who came from L's primary area.

Granted, L was in a bad position and the evaluator would ream the L for that first, but that secondary defender should have been L's call.

imho, 95% of the time when an offensive player takes a "running-floater", the defensive player DID NOT establish LGP prior to the shooter leaving the ground.....

this play (and the 95% of the other ones like this) is a BLOCK!

So, you base the call against the defense on the type of shot the offense takes?

Where do I find more information on this?

This play may be a block, but your first paragraph is just wrong, IMHO.

The last time his left foot touched, perhaps....but it was down 1-2 times before that. He was in the path and had both feet down several times before he reached his final position....but he was moving forward after the shooter was airborne.

Even you agree since you're mentioning his final two steps....the previous steps satisfied the two-feet on the court provision.


And a player can have LGP in the RA. Until the play develops, you can't conclude he is a secondary defender. If the dribbler/driver stops, pivots and then collides, he has become a primary defender and the position is legal. If the driver/dribbler continues in one motion, the position is not legal.

Sorry, I meant as the primary whistle on that play. If he's secondary - which he should be - that's a different story. But if he's across the lane his whistle should come in later than the C's.

I still don't have a problem with L not putting a whistle on this particular play since he appeared to be straight-lined when the contact took place. He probably should've rotated once there was pressure in front of Valentine but he hesitated.

Okay, so as the play developed it became apparent the Duke player was a secondary defender which meant he couldn't establish LGP inside the RA. That means he had to establish outside the RA and he didn't. It was very close but he didn't. His left foot wasn't down outside the RA before the shooter went airborne.

A valid point.

;););););)