Block/Charge RA Play: Off Rebound

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Not if he throws his shoulder into the defender. The player does not have to be LGP just to get a foul called in their favor IMO.

Peace

But that is not what we're talking about in this play. There was no shove, clearout, or thrown shoulder. The shooter merely stepped towards the basket and went up. The defender stepped into him and committed a foul.

For that matter, show me where "throwing a shoulder" is defined. I don't recall seeing that in the rulebook.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

...For that matter, show me where "throwing a shoulder" is defined. I don't recall seeing that in the rulebook.

I'm sure somebody could conjure up something if that's what side of the argument they wanted to be on.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

I'm sure somebody could conjure up something if that's what side of the argument they wanted to be on.

Yes, it is a made up rule. A lot of people call a charge because a shooter/dribbler comes through with their head/shoulder down. Nothing in the book requires the shooter to be in any specific orientation (only defenders). In fact, with references to "head and shoulders" getting past the defender, that seems to imply that head and shoulders, to some degree, leading the way is expected.

Defenders must legally cut off the dribbler. If they don't, it is a block. It doesn't matter how the dribbler comes in (excluding extended limbs....push-offs with the arm or kicks with the foot)....if the defender is not legal, it is not a charge.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

I'm sure somebody could conjure up something if that's what side of the argument they wanted to be on.

We all know it's right after the "protect the shooter" clause and before the "tie goes to the runner" section.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

But that is not what we're talking about in this play. There was no shove, clearout, or thrown shoulder. The shooter merely stepped towards the basket and went up. The defender stepped into him and committed a foul.

For that matter, show me where "throwing a shoulder" is defined. I don't recall seeing that in the rulebook.

Well I am not saying the term is in the rulebook. But the actions that explain what you can or cannot do are in the rulebook. The guy threw his body forward to try to get space IMO. That is a foul on the dribbler despite how legal a defender is or not. Now this is a judgment call, but that action I saw is consistent of that. LGP is about movement to cut a path off from a ball handler. That does not give the dribbler or ball handler the right to create space because the defender might not be legal at some point.

Peace

[rockyroad]

We have to judge who created or caused the contact in some of these plays. In this play, the contact was created by the offensive player jumping into the defender, imo. It really is that simple sometimes - again, imo.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

We have to judge who created or caused the contact in some of these plays. In this play, the contact was created by the offensive player jumping into the defender, imo. It really is that simple sometimes - again, imo.

I totally agree. But some people have to worry about every specific wording in the rulebook and forget that many of what we do is judgment based on our experience and understanding of those rules.

Peace

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I totally agree. But some people have to worry about every specific wording in the rulebook and forget that many of what we do is judgment based on our experience and understanding of those rules.

Peace

There are extremes both ways...the "rulebook officials" and the ones who don't bother to get into the books because they "don't need to know that stuff." I think the best officials are the ones who can blend the two...had a former NBA official at a camp tell me "Don't be a rulebook official. They don't last very long. But you better know the rules you are basing your judgement calls on or you won't last long either."

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

There are extremes both ways...the "rulebook officials" and the ones who don't bother to get into the books because they "don't need to know that stuff." I think the best officials are the ones who can blend the two...had a former NBA official at a camp tell me "Don't be a rulebook official. They don't last very long. But you better know the rules you are basing your judgement calls on or you won't last long either."

I have said that term here and got ripped for saying "Don't be a rulebook official."

All that has ever meant to me is when guys are so stuck on specific language that they do not understand what the intent of the rule is for or why it was created. Or they forget there are other elements of rules that are stated. And when an official reads a rule and calls the slightest violation of that rule that no one but them sees, that is being a rulebook official to me. Our job should be to call obvious violations and fouls that take place, not just some minor contact and claim a foul was made, but forget that the rules on incidental contact also are listed in that same rulebook.

Peace

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I have said that term here and got ripped for saying "Don't be a rulebook official."
Peace

It is a good saying and philosophy, when properly used. When it is used to justify a call in a way that is not supported by the rules, it is nothing more than a canard.

This play is about LGP and nothing else...did the defender have it or not. We can certainly disagree about whether the defender had it or not but to claim it is about anything else (i.e., who created contact, made space, etc.) is nothing more than a way to try to justify a call when you can't justify it by the rules. This is not a 1 in a million situation. This is a bread and butter call. This is not a "rulebook official" situation. It is about basic definitions. What is LGP.

The defender was in the path and had two feet down, there is no question about that....the defender had LGP. The ONLY question is whether he legally moved while maintaining it. Movement is allowed but not if it is toward the opponent at the time of contact. That is pretty basic part of the definition. The player was either moving forward or he wasn't. If so, it is a foul on the defense. There is no other factor to consider. What the offense is doing is irrelevant (unless it is about something other than block/charge). We can certainly disagree about whether he was moving forward or not at the wrong time, but, there are no restrictions on the movement of the player with the ball if the defender is not in LGP. It is the defender's sole responsibility to be in the path legally and to be moving legally if they are moving. That is why we referee the defense. What they do or don't do determines who the foul is on. Disagree about whether the defender is moving forward if you wish, I can accept that. But stick to rules-based reasoning rather than some cliche.