Tenn St/Murray St
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 |
I liked a no-call with 4.4 seconds left because the offensive avoided alot of the contact and the defensive let himself fall. The offensive player landed on his feet. Only the defender ended up on the floor. Despite the comments by the talking head, I agreed with the no-call.
I can't comment on the earlier call. I tuned in late to the telecast. |
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/4fOdXVkqnl4" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
And I'd be okay with the no-call (on the merits of the play itself), but would have liked to have seen the baseline camera angle. |
Hard to tell by video, I'll go with the no call because the lead had a very good angle/look at it.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
What do you guys think about the final shot though? I didn't see any officials waving off the shot, though the defender caught and shot with only 0.3 remaining
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
The play could be a charging foul or a no call, but not a PC.
There is contact, but it is not solid contact. I watched the video numerous times and was able to deem that the try was released prior to the contact, so the basket would have counted even had a charging foul been called. Of course, Tenn State would have been awarded a 1-1 at the other end as Murray State already had six team fouls in the second half at the time of this play. This would have provided the opportunity to tie the game with FTs. |
Quote:
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. |
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. :p |
Quote:
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. |
Quote:
I'd like to see the end line angle, like APG mentioned as well. |
Quote:
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. |
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:08am. |