Say What???

[APG]

Originally Posted by vbzebra

Watching Olympics hoops (mainly the officials) with my better looking and smarter half, and she asked me a question that I didn't have an answer to (yes, add THAT one to the list too...shocker

Basically, with FIBA/Olympic officials being from different countries, working games with different countries, how does the language barrier come in to play? I know there is a "language of officiating" with mechanics, etc., but what about communication with coaches and even eachother? Say I'm working France/Spain, partner A is from Italy, Partner B from Germany or somewhere, and I speak neither French, Spanish, Italian or German? Does each crew always have someone who can speak other languages? Is that an Olympic/FIBA requrement? Are there translators? Looking for some honest answers from anyone in the know, please

I believe in FIFA, the official language is English and therefore, the officials are required to be able to speak it. I'd assume FIBA has something similar

Originally Posted by bainsey

Thanks, Jay. I don't see "secondary defender" in there anywhere. Interesting.

Here are some interpreations in regard to the no charge semi-circle:
FIBA 2010 Interpretations


STATEMENT
The purpose of the no-charge semi-circle rule is not to reward a defensive player who has taken a position under his own basket in order to draw a charging foul against an offensive player who is in control of the ball and is penetrating towards the basket.

For the no-charge semi-circle rule to be applied:

(a) The defensive player shall have both feet inside the semi-circle area (see Diagram 1). The semi-circle line is not part of the semi-circle area.

(b) The offensive player shall drive to the basket across the semi-circle line and attempt a shot for a field goal or a pass while airborne.

The no-charge semi-circle rule is not to be applied and any contact shall be judged according to normal regulations, e. g. cylinder principle, charge/block principle:

(a) For all play situations occurring outside the no-charge semi-circle area, also developing from the area between the semi-circle area and the endline.

(b) For all rebounding play situations when, after a shot for a field goal, the ball rebounds and a contact situation occurs.

(c) For any illegal use of the hands, arms, legs or body by either offensive or defensive player.

You're right in that the rule doesn't mention secondary defenders, but in essence, the rule is all but written with secondary defenders in mind as realistically speaking, that's going to be the only defender that would have both feet entirely in the no charge semi-circle attempting to take a charge.

[SmokeEater]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

I believe in FIFA, the official language is English and therefore, the officials are required to be able to speak it. I'd assume FIBA has something similar

You are correct sir! English is the official language of FIBA.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by SmokeEater

You are correct sir! English is the official language of FIBA.

Now that's good news. How about the official FIBA system of measurement?

(Note: National Geographic claims that many languages are dying out, at a rapidly accelerating pace. Eventually all the inhabitants of Earth will be speaking just four languages: English, Spanish, Hindi, or Mandarin. Eventually we'll all be speaking the same language and then we'll get together to build a tower high up into the sky. Maybe we'll call it the Tower of Babel? Wait? That already happened. Nevermind.)

[johnny d]

gotta disagree with you snaqs, the ra is a good rule. i see way less crashes near the hoop in the college games i officiate as compared to the hs games i work because the defensive players know they either have to get over and help sooner, thus putting themselves in a position to actually defend the basket, or get out of the way. imo, there is no way a defensive player should be rewarded for obtaining/maintaining lg position in the restricted area. they need to get their *** out further and play some actual defense.

[APG]

Originally Posted by johnny d

gotta disagree with you snaqs, the ra is a good rule. i see way less crashes near the hoop in the college games i officiate as compared to the hs games i work because the defensive players know they either have to get over and help sooner, thus putting themselves in a position to actually defend the basket, or get out of the way. imo, there is no way a defensive player should be rewarded for obtaining/maintaining lg position in the restricted area. they need to get their *** out further and play some actual defense.

I personally think it makes for a better game, but you'll have the other side point out that the offensive player should just pull up and shoot a pull up. Personally, I like the defense either getting further out to take the charge, or jump and attempt to block the shot...and the RA forces defenders to do that instead of just running to a spot near the basket.

Tl;dr version: We basically agree with each other.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by johnny d

gotta disagree with you snaqs, the ra is a good rule. i see way less crashes near the hoop in the college games i officiate as compared to the hs games i work because the defensive players know they either have to get over and help sooner, thus putting themselves in a position to actually defend the basket, or get out of the way. imo, there is no way a defensive player should be rewarded for obtaining/maintaining lg position in the restricted area. they need to get their *** out further and play some actual defense.

I think there's nothing wrong with a defender cutting off a shooter's path. They do it all over the floor, but since officials were too apt to no-call close plays, they took the judgment away.

You know what works to reduce crashes in my games? Blowing the whistle. Get a PC, and the offense adjusts. Get a block, and the defense adjusts.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

I think there's nothing wrong with a defender cutting off a shooter's path. They do it all over the floor, but since officials were too apt to no-call close plays, they took the judgment away.

You know what works to reduce crashes in my games? Blowing the whistle. Get a PC, and the offense adjusts. Get a block, and the defense adjusts.

There is still judgment involved, they just took away the arbitrary line to not make a call. Now you have to call something instead of swallowing the whistle if you want credibility.

Peace

[Adam]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

There is still judgment involved, they just took away the arbitrary line to not make a call. Now you have to call something instead of swallowing the whistle if you want credibility.

Peace

The only judgment left is whether he's on the line. (I know, that's slightly over simplified.)

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

You're right in that the rule doesn't mention secondary defenders, but in essence, the rule is all but written with secondary defenders in mind as realistically speaking, that's going to be the only defender that would have both feet entirely in the no charge semi-circle attempting to take a charge.

I disagree. A primary defender coming in the the play who backs themselves into the semi-circle just before contact can't get the charge as this rule appears to be written where they can under NCAA rules (and presumably NBA rules)

[APG]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

I disagree. A primary defender coming in the the play who backs themselves into the semi-circle just before contact can't get the charge as this rule appears to be written where they can under NCAA rules (and presumably NBA rules)

Well that could happen, but first of all, the primary defender would have to be completely in the no charge semi circle to not be legal. That affords the defender some extra space to take a charge. More often than not, I'm thinking if a primary defender were going to take a charge, they wouldn't that deep near the basket.