Clean Block or a Foul?

[APG]

Originally Posted by HawkeyeCubP

2. The NCAA RA rules currently make no mention/exception/allowance for a player blocking or attempting to block a shot.

Not saying you're wrong, but why does 4-35-7...the very last bit mention:

"This restriction shall not prohibit a defender, located within the restricted area, from attempting to block a shot."

To me, the RA has always been about secondary defenders trying to get into position to draw a charge on an opponent. A defender who jumps verticality is not setting up to draw a charge, but playing active defense, and thus the RA shouldn't apply.

[HawkeyeCubP]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

Not saying you're wrong, but why does 4-35-7...the very last bit mention:

"This restriction shall not prohibit a defender, located within the restricted area, from attempting to block a shot."

To me, the RA has always been about secondary defenders trying to get into position to draw a charge on an opponent. A defender who jumps verticality is not setting up to draw a charge, but playing active defense, and thus the RA shouldn't apply.

I like it. And then it still comes to clean block and then incidental contact (albeit, a decent amount).

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

Not saying you're wrong, but why does 4-35-7...the very last bit mention:

"This restriction shall not prohibit a defender, located within the restricted area, from attempting to block a shot."

To me, the RA has always been about secondary defenders trying to get into position to draw a charge on an opponent. A defender who jumps verticality is not setting up to draw a charge, but playing active defense, and thus the RA shouldn't apply.

I agree because most likely any illegal contact that occurs when a defender maintains verticality in a block attempt would come from an offensive player leading with his foot/leg or warding off of with his arm, which are both PC fouls that override the secondary defender RA restrictions.

[HawkeyeCubP]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

I agree because most likely any illegal contact that occurs when a defender maintains verticality in a block attempt would come from an offensive player leading with his foot/leg or warding off of with his arm, which are both PC fouls that override the secondary defender RA restrictions.

Agreed.

[tref]

Hold up, wait a minute!

APG am I mistaken or is the RA only for block/charge situations??

If a 2ndary defender is in the RA & is NOT trying to draw a charge, but block a shot instead then everything RA related is off unless the offense does something illegal, no?
We can still have a foul on the attempted blocked shot by the defender but we dont use the RA mechanic, right?

[SamIAm]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

OK, not trying to be a jerk here, but is anyone else seeing what bainsey is saying? Honest question because maybe I am missing it somehow...I just don't see the defender jumping into the shooter - I see it the other way entirely.

Anyone else see the defender jumping into the shooter?

I do. Details-
B1 -KU-0 jumps from RA toward the sideline putting himself into A1 path, my guestimate is about 2 feet of actual floor distance (B1 would have landed outside the RA with no contact from A1, enough to go into A1's path). A1 and B1 make contact,
A1's contact was lower on B1 causing B1's feet to land nearer the endline, but offbalance stumbling forward as his upperbody is farther forward.
Look past B1, at the blue lights/windows in the distance, can't see them now you do, B1 was moving forward.

I am a KU fan and was surprised no foul was called after seeing APG's replay.

[APG]

Originally Posted by tref

Hold up, wait a minute!

APG am I mistaken or is the RA only for block/charge situations??

If a 2ndary defender is in the RA & is NOT trying to draw a charge, but block a shot instead then everything RA related is off unless the offense does something illegal, no?
We can still have a foul on the attempted blocked shot by the defender but we dont use the RA mechanic, right?

That's how I understood the rule.

[tref]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

That's how I understood the rule.

Ok I'm good then, thanks.

[bainsey]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

You do realize he landed behind the spot he jumped from don't you?

He landed there due to the impact with the shooter.

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

bainsey - don't take the "high school official" comment too seriously...

Not offended whatsoever. I completely agree that, often times, some calls unnecessarily penalize the defense. I don't believe this is one of them. I see neither verticality nor incidental contact here. Until a supervisor tells me otherwise, that's what I'll go with.

Originally Posted by tref

Because the shooter got his try wiped clean prior to the contact.

He was unquestionably wiped clean. I simply don't believe that's license to level someone, and that a defender has to be responsible for his momentum (verticality notwithstanding). If the rules say otherwise, that's good enough for me to convert.

[berserkBBK]

I keep trying to see it as a foul, but every time I have a clean play. If I would have called this a foul I would have been kicking myself all the way to the table for not having a patient whistle.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by asdf

Not a foul in the first 10 seconds of the game, and not a foul in the last 10 seconds of the game.

How about the middle 1900 seconds?

[berserkBBK]

Originally Posted by bainsey

He was unquestionably wiped clean. I simply don't believe that's license to level someone, and that a defender has to be responsible for his momentum (verticality notwithstanding). If the rules say otherwise, that's good enough for me to convert.

I see this as a guard and a shot blocking center making contact. Who is going to take the brunt of the contact? This in like when a taller player jumps up and takes a ball off a rebound from a shorter player. Of course everyone keeps yelling for "over the back". I'm not punishing a tall player for his size, and on this play I'm not punishing a center for being bigger than a guard and taking the contact better.

[APG]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

How about the middle 1900 seconds?

No, you didn't have to ask.

[tref]

Originally Posted by berserkBBK

I see this as a guard and a shot blocking center making contact. Who is going to take the brunt of the contact? This in like when a taller player jumps up and takes a ball off a rebound from a shorter player. Of course everyone keeps yelling for "over the back". I'm not punishing a tall player for his size, and on this play I'm not punishing a center for being bigger than a guard and taking the contact better.

+1

Now in a 5th grade girls game, yes, call the foul.

[ballgame99]

How can that much contact not result in a foul? You can say fans are stupid and don't know the rules (most don't and this is a true statement most of the time) but when they see a guy go up for a layup and get clobbered I don't think it is unreasonable to expect a foul call.

A1 is airborn before B1 even takes off, B1 comes in chopping downward hard and creates significant contact. He is not vertical at all, he comes from opposite side, he takes off in the middle of the circle and contact occurs outside the circle, he would have landed outside the lane if no contact. Whether he got ball clean up top before contact has nothing to do with anything.

So by most in here the little guys should not even bother taking anything in the lane because if the big guy comes through you and gets ball first its not a foul???

And for those that didn't see the finish of the game, they called a touch foul on Missouri on an out of control KU player with 8 seconds left in OT for the go ahead free throws.