Call on the court = Block. Your opinion?

[bainsey]

I have a PC by a hair.

The defender doesn't have LGP until after the gather -- which doesn't matter by rule -- though she has it just before the shooter goes airborne. Still, that's a tough call for the defender to come that far away without LGP and nail it at the last possible split-second.

[drofficial]

What is really baffling to me is why we are even discussing this play. By rule,. it is totally and clearly 100% a charge. Offensive player does not get head and shoulders by defender. She goes straight thru the torso. This is an amazingly easy call. There is NOTHING in the rule about "being set," "not moving," etc. And there is certainly no time or distance involved. Defender beats her to the spot and offensive player runs her over. Charge every time.

We officials really screw up the game when we call plays like this a block.

[tref]

Originally Posted by drofficial

What is really baffling to me is why we are even discussing this play. By rule,. it is totally and clearly 100% a charge. Offensive player does not get head and shoulders by defender. She goes straight thru the torso. This is an amazingly easy call. There is NOTHING in the rule about "being set," "not moving," etc. And there is certainly no time or distance involved. Defender beats her to the spot and offensive player runs her over. Charge every time.

We officials really screw up the game when we call plays like this a block.

I thought the offense had to get head & shoulders by the primary defender
Pretty tough to get by someone whos not there to get by .

[IUgrad92]

Originally Posted by drofficial

What is really baffling to me is why we are even discussing this play. By rule,. it is totally and clearly 100% a charge. Offensive player does not get head and shoulders by defender. She goes straight thru the torso. This is an amazingly easy call. There is NOTHING in the rule about "being set," "not moving," etc. And there is certainly no time or distance involved. Defender beats her to the spot and offensive player runs her over. Charge every time.

We officials really screw up the game when we call plays like this a block.

The offensive and defensive players are coming from 2 totally different angles and then there is contact at point A. So I'm seeing the defensive player impeding on the offensive player's path to the basket without first maintaining LGP. Therefore I have a block.

Has nothing to do with 'not being set' or 'not moving'. It's all about not having LGP prior to the contact, IMHO.

[tref]

Originally Posted by IUgrad92

The offensive and defensive players are coming from 2 totally different angles and then there is contact at point A. So I'm seeing the defensive player impeding on the offensive player's path to the basket without first maintaining LGP. Therefore I have a block.

Has nothing to do with 'not being set' or 'not moving'. It's all about not having LGP prior to the contact, IMHO.

Thats how I see this play as well, she cant maintain what she never obtained... by rule.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by IUgrad92

The offensive and defensive players are coming from 2 totally different angles and then there is contact at point A. So I'm seeing the defensive player impeding on the offensive player's path to the basket without first maintaining LGP. Therefore I have a block.

Has nothing to do with 'not being set' or 'not moving'. It's all about not having LGP prior to the contact, IMHO.

I've been fascinated to read all the different opinions of this play, even in slow motion. I have a defender, with established LGP, moving backwards and to her right (obliquely, not towards the shooter), and getting hit in the chest by the dribbler. To me, it's a pretty solid PC foul, but the disagreement is still fascinating to me.

[tref]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

I've been fascinated to read all the different opinions of this play, even in slow motion. I have a defender, with established LGP, moving backwards and to her right (obliquely, not towards the shooter), and getting hit in the chest by the dribbler. To me, it's a pretty solid PC foul, but the disagreement is still fascinating to me.

I'm willing to give it another look. At what time is LGP obtained?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by tref

I'm willing to give it another look. At what time is LGP obtained?

I initially had her with LGP from the start, but with a more narrow view of "in the path," I can see why you'd say she didn't have it that long. Either way, I have her, at the latest, getting LGP right before contact in her chest.

And I still say the extended trail leg is irrelevant unless it's the point of contact.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by tref

I'm willing to give it another look. At what time is LGP obtained?

As I said earlier, she didn't, IMO.

The "path" goes through "the block". To obtain LGP after sliding in front of the shooter, she must have two feet on the floor while having her torso (not just a foot) over the block. She puts her right foot on the block and is still coming into position. She lifts her left foot in order to shift her torso into the path and never gets it back to the floor before contact....no LGP.

[Tio]

I do not officiate women's basketball, but I have a block and don't see it being close.

On another topic, Is the outside official supposed to make this call? I have seen lots of women's officials make this call from the outside so I'm curious if the mechanic/primary coverage is different. It seems like a difficult playcalling sequence coming from the outside official on a secondary defender.

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by Tio

I do not officiate women's basketball, but I have a block and don't see it being close.

On another topic, Is the outside official supposed to make this call? I have seen lots of women's officials make this call from the outside so I'm curious if the mechanic/primary coverage is different. It seems like a difficult playcalling sequence coming from the outside official on a secondary defender.

Yes this call should come from the C - who happens to be in a terrible position on this play. And it's not a secondary defender - there was never any other defender to be a "primary defender" who got beat. So the C should have this call as the drive originated in his primary.

[JetMetFan]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

Yes this call should come from the C - who happens to be in a terrible position on this play. And it's not a secondary defender - there was never any other defender to be a "primary defender" who got beat. So the C should have this call as the drive originated in his primary.

Rocky, I don't think DeMayo's (the C) positioning is that bad because part of his job on that play was to follow/stay even with the ball as it came up court, which he did.

When he made the call he looked to be about 3-4' above the FT line extended - not ideal but I'm guessing that's where he felt he had to stop to be able to see the dribbler.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by JetMetFan

This particular block/charge was very very close and the drive started from the C's PCA therefore it is his call. That said, the C was pretty much where he should havd been, I would have liked to see him close down as the offensive player drove to the basket, meaning that I don't think he was in the best position to officiate the defense and the L was somewhat straight-lined too, leaving the least likely of the three, the T, with possiblly the best angle to see that this was a charge.

MTD, Sr.