Tenn St/Murray St

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by JetMetFan

Opinions on block/charge situation with 4.4 seconds left.

I have a charge, especially since the crew had called a similar play a PC a few minutes earlier.

(btw...I love YouTube. I knew someone would have this posted in a heartbeat)

Murray State beats Tennessee State - YouTube

By chance do you work NCAA Women's games?

I only ask because it has been my observation that the officials on the women's side most frequently call this level of contact a charging foul while those on the men's side most often ignore it.

[JugglingReferee]

I thought the same as NV: release, then contact.

The feet of the defender were right on the lane line. He was in great position to "take the charge". I wonder why this level of contact is not a foul. I don't believe it's "minor" or "minimal" contact. Though in this case, I do think that B may have been leaning back when the contact happened.

If that's the way NCAA-M want it called, then so be it. My personal opinion is to follow the rule more closely than the philosophy. Count the basket, call the charging foul, and award the 1+1 at the other end of the court.

However, I only work HS (and soon college!) here in small town Canada, and not national TV NCAA-M games.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by JugglingReferee

I thought the same as NV: release, then contact.

The feet of the defender were right on the lane line. He was in great position to "take the charge". I wonder why this level of contact is not a foul. I don't believe it's "minor" or "minimal" contact.

From the video, it looks to me that the offensive player does not go directly through the defender, but catches him to one side of his torso.

To be more descriptive, it appears that the contact is on the right pectoral, bicep, and the front of the right shoulder of the defender, then the offensive player is able to slide away and step down to the end line instead of continuing through the defender. It also seems to be significant that the offensive player stays on his feet. By the book, this certainly could be a charge, but this is the level of contact of which I wrote that NCAAW refs are mostly whistling and NCAAM refs are mostly ignoring. That's my observation from viewing the TV games.

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

From the video, it looks to me that the offensive player does not go directly through the defender, but catches him to one side of his torso.

Gotcha.


I'd like to see the end line angle, like APG mentioned as well.

[JetMetFan]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

By chance do you work NCAA Women's games?

I only ask because it has been my observation that the officials on the women's side most frequently call this level of contact a charging foul while those on the men's side most often ignore it.

Hey Nev -

Yes, I do. That's also why I forgot the charge/PC rule which still exists on the men's side. Between NFHS and NCAAW I haven't had to apply that one since the last time I worked an adult rec game, which was years ago.

I do agree with you regarding what we call vs. what NCAAM call. We're more inclined to put a whistle on those plays because from what I've found the women's coaches want us to make a call one way or another.

[Brad]

The no call is correct here. Defender is trying to get in there and create contact — he is moving slightly under the shooter. The shooter doesn't make very much contact though. You can tell, because the shooter never goes to the floor.

This is what a flop looks like folks.

[JugglingReferee]

I'd like to see the play that "was similar just a few minutes earlier".

[Toren]

First viewing, I say no call.

[truerookie]

I say if this was in the early part of the half. This would be a PC. By it being with 4.4 seconds left you will not get this call.

[Brad]

Originally Posted by truerookie

I say if this was in the early part of the half. This would be a PC. By it being with 4.4 seconds left you will not get this call.

That is awful thinking and I hope that you don't really referee that way.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Brad

That is awful thinking and I hope that you don't really referee that way.

Won't get past middle school with that mindset in most areas.

[truerookie]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Won't get past middle school with that mindset in most areas.

Snaqwells you should be a fortune teller. The one thing I will not do is allow GROUPTHINK influence how I should apply a rule. I stand by my assessment. You will not get this call with that little time on the clock versus the early part of the half.

I really enjoy how you and your GROUPTHINK MEMBERS can make an assessment of others and haven't even seen them on the court/film/person or anything.

[Brad]

Originally Posted by truerookie

Snaqwells you should be a fortune teller. The one thing I will not do is allow GROUPTHINK influence how I should apply a rule. I stand by my assessment. You will not get this call with that little time on the clock versus the early part of the half.

I really enjoy how you and your GROUPTHINK MEMBERS can make an assessment of others and haven't even seen them on the court/film/person or anything.

Every stop to think that it's not GROUPTHINK, but several individuals agreeing, which makes it a CONSENSUS?

My response was based on what you WROTE. It's awful thinking. And if you referee like that, it's awful. I don't need to see you on the court to determine that.

You can be a great guy and a good referee and still be wrong

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by Brad

Every stop to think that it's not GROUPTHINK, but several individuals agreeing, which makes it a CONSENSUS?

Whoa, whoa, whoa!!!

Brad, we have worked hard to indoctrinate these people over the years. Don't just be throwing away all our brain-washing techniques and calling it "consensus". Geesh.

And as far as the play and the ensuing dialogue...no call at any point in the game. There just isn't enough to call a foul here. And the "don't make that call at the end of a game" mindset really went by the wayside about 6 or 7 years ago.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by truerookie

Snaqwells you should be a fortune teller. The one thing I will not do is allow GROUPTHINK influence how I should apply a rule. I stand by my assessment. You will not get this call with that little time on the clock versus the early part of the half.

I really enjoy how you and your GROUPTHINK MEMBERS can make an assessment of others and haven't even seen them on the court/film/person or anything.

GROUPTHINK? Sort of sounds like a synonym for consistency to me.