Murray State v. Marquette
 

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/6IYZLQ1Ohp8" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

I could go PC on this one since the shoulder charge is what leads to the defender getting knocked a few feet back and his arms to lose verticality.

Nope.

Defender was moving forward at the time of that contact so they didn't have LGP. Shoulder doesn't mean much of the defender is illegal.

Camron:

I was going to watch the video but I read your post first and that was all I needed to know.

MTD, Sr.

Foul was called b/c B1's arms were never vertical, even before A1 contacted him with the shoulder. But B1 was not moving forward at time of contact.

Look again...B1's feet (foot) were inside the RA just before the shoulder contact and were coming forward...several inches outside of the RA at the time of that contact. Can't get between those two points without moving forward.

The foul that was called was not for that, indeed, but the block/charge element of the play was a block. There was a claim that this body contact caused the arms to not be vertical.

Agreed, it wasn't just his feet, either. His torso was moving also.

Could have easily been a no call.

I agree, B1 arms are not vertical and that's where I think they called the foul, but IMO there is clear displacement from A1 her well prior to the upstairs contact.

Thanks for posting and discussing.

That movement by B1's feet occurred while A1 while still moving laterally. B1's feet were set again before the contact from A1's shoulder.

I just can't picture moving your feet forward while moving laterally while you body is connected to your feet.

Re-read my post.

And look at the video. A1's initial movement takes him in a direction away from the basket. B1 move's his feet forward during A1's initial movement.

PS: if someone moves diagonally they will then have moved laterally and forward relative to their previous position

And if ANY part of that movement, even if there is lateral movement, is forward, that is all that matters. Moving laterally doesn't excuse forward movement. And the forward movement that I'm referring to happened at exactly the time of the shoulder contact. Maybe there was other forward movement too but the only movement that matters is that which occurred at the very moment of contact.

This is being over-thought and is an easy play. The contact by the offense was marginal, not even close to being enough for a foul. Was the defense vertical...no=foul. If you call a PC on that play you will not be working that level for long.

Side note, notice the L doubling the whistle. This was a routine defensive foul. These are also two of the very best in the tourney, wouldn't be surprised to see the C in the FF (probably an alternate) and the L in a regional semi/final.

No. I will call that every time.

Peace

Who is advocating a PC on this play? I'm advocating no block on the initial contact and a clear foul for defender's arms not being vertical on the shot. And the 'L' is who took the call to the table.

Oh...it sure sounded like you were advocating that the defender we moving legally.

I was, on the initial contact, because he wasn't moving when the shoulder hit his torso.

Ringo mentions "clear displacement before the contact upstairs", and sniper said he could go PC because of the "shoulder charge". My comments were directed there.

IMO, all of the body contact, both by the offense and defense, is marginal while the lack of verticality by the defenfer's arms is where the fouls occurs.

My 0.02

Agree not even close to PC.

But disagree that this couldn't have been a no-call.

I've seen less contact called a PC (initial shoulder bump) when the defender falls backward. This defender tries to absorb it.

Agree that this is a foul, I just don't like when offensive players create that much contact (specifically referring to the initial shoulder bump). We all agree we aren't going to call that a charge if the defender stands there and tries to absorb it, but then we are going to give the guy a foul call when his arms aren't entirely vertical?

A no call here would not have bothered me a bit.

If he had kept his arms vertical (and there never were, even before the bump) I would not have a foul for him stepping into A1 when he actually shot.

Thanks for discussing. IMO it just seems like offensive player moved defensive player quite a bit. I felt like defensive player was there, granted arms were not vertical... Again thanks!

I agree, looking back, the first move by the offensive player causes the defender to jump back into the semi-circle. Defender then jumps back into original spot.

When offensive player shoots, defender is not at all straight up, but I think offense causes some of this contact - which is why I think unless you are calling it super-tight because the tempo of the game needs it, you can call this a draw and no-call it.

+1