block/charge/no call considerations

[BillyMac]

Will the NFHS ever go to the secondary defender arc under the basket? If so, when?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Will the NFHS ever go to the secondary defender arc under the basket? If so, when?

I hope not. As long as we don't have too many officials no-calling the OP play because they don't like calling a PC under the basket, we should be fine.

[tref]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Will the NFHS ever go to the secondary defender arc under the basket? If so, when?

I hope so, it would be good for the game! The RA takes the guessing out for officials, reduces potential injury for players in the heart of the paint & promotes a free flowing game.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by tref

I hope so, it would be good for the game! The RA takes the guessing out for officials, reduces potential injury for players in the heart of the paint & promotes a free flowing game.

Guessing about what?

No more so than calling the charges on the offense...and probably even less so

Not really.

It really just robs the defense of its ability to guard the path to the basket.

[tref]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Guessing about what?

No more so than calling the charges on the offense...and probably even less so

Not really.

It really just robs the defense of its ability to guard the path to the basket.

Just my opinions based on my experiences, many times the lesser experienced officials dont pick up the secondary defender in time (prior to contact) & when the crash happens... they guess. The RA provides us with a formula. In the RA = a block & it also allows the T or C to provide info to "get the play right."

I dont see the defense getting robbed of anything. Get there before the shooter alights or get out the way! The people came to see made baskets NOT collisions in the paint.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by tref

Just my opinions based on my experiences, many times the lesser experienced officials dont pick up the secondary defender in time (prior to contact) & when the crash happens... they guess. The RA provides us with a formula. In the RA = a block & it also allows the T or C to provide info to "get the play right."

That may be (regarding the lesser experienced officials) but that was no reason to turn a perfectly good change into a block just because some officials got it wrong as a result of not looking in the right spot. It wasn't that adding the RA made us get it right, it changed the balance of offense and defense.

Originally Posted by tref

I don't see the defense getting robbed of anything. Get there before the shooter alights or get out the way! The people came to see made baskets NOT collisions in the paint.

Sure they are. With the RA they can be there before the shooter alights and they still get called with a block..just because their heels are on the RA arc.

People also come to see good defense and offensive players making good decisions when their path is being cut off. The collisions would have stopped if officials would have just called the rules as they already were....as a charge. Offensive players wouldn't have continued to drive into trouble. The RA penalizes the player making the better play instead of the player who had control of the situation yet forced it anyway.

If a defender occupies any path through which the opponent wishes to go, that should be considered great defense no matter where it is on the court.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

That may be (regarding the lesser experienced officials) but that was no reason to turn a perfectly good change into a block just because some officials got it wrong as a result of not looking in the right spot. It wasn't that adding the RA made us get it right, it changed the balance of offense and defense.



Sure they are. With the RA they can be there before the shooter alights and they still get called with a block..just because their heels are on the RA arc.

People also come to see good defense and offensive players making good decisions when their path is being cut off. The collisions would have stopped if officials would have just called the rules as they already were....as a charge. Offensive players wouldn't have continued to drive into trouble. The RA penalizes the player making the better play instead of the player who had control of the situation yet forced it anyway.

If a defender occupies any path through which the opponent wishes to go, that should be considered great defense no matter where it is on the court.

^ This.

[APG]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

People also come to see good defense and offensive players making good decisions when their path is being cut off. The collisions would have stopped if officials would have just called the rules as they already were....as a charge. Offensive players wouldn't have continued to drive into trouble. The RA penalizes the player making the better play instead of the player who had control of the situation yet forced it anyway.

If a defender occupies any path through which the opponent wishes to go, that should be considered great defense no matter where it is on the court.

Except most people (fans, coaches, players) don't consider a help defender standing so close to the basket for the sole purpose of just taking a charge as good defense like it or not. They'd rather see a defender attempt to block a shot or go for the steal or have the primary defender move his feet and cut the defender off (the sole time most people deem it acceptable to take a charge near/under the basket). Was the fact that officials weren't calling this a charge/PC by rule an expediting factor in bringing in the RA? Probably...but I think there's been a clear shift in ideology on this type of play, and I for one like it....and so does every single major rule set save for NFHS.

[tref]

Originally Posted by APG

Except most people (fans, coaches, players) don't consider a help defender standing so close to the basket for the sole purpose of just taking a charge as good defense like it or not. They'd rather see a defender attempt to block a shot or go for the steal or have the primary defender move his feet and cut the defender off (the sole time most people deem it acceptable to take a charge near/under the basket). Was the fact that officials weren't calling this a charge/PC by rule an expediting factor in bringing in the RA? Probably...but I think there's been a clear shift in ideology on this type of play, and I for one like it....and so does every single major rule set save for NFHS.

^ That.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by APG

Except most people (fans, coaches, players) don't consider a help defender standing so close to the basket for the sole purpose of just taking a charge as good defense like it or not. They'd rather see a defender attempt to block a shot or go for the steal or have the primary defender move his feet and cut the defender off (the sole time most people deem it acceptable to take a charge near/under the basket). Was the fact that officials weren't calling this a charge/PC by rule an expediting factor in bringing in the RA? Probably...but I think there's been a clear shift in ideology on this type of play, and I for one like it....and so does every single major rule set save for NFHS.

Only because they're lemmings who've been conditioned by sports center to expect that.

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by APG

Except most people (fans, coaches, players) don't consider a help FROM THE OTHER TEAM defender standing so close to the basket for the sole purpose of just taking a charge as good defense like it or not.

Fixed that one for ya...

If it's "their" team - it's a great play.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by tref

Just my opinions based on my experiences, many times the lesser experienced officials dont pick up the secondary defender in time (prior to contact) & when the crash happens... they guess. The RA provides us with a formula. In the RA = a block & it also allows the T or C to provide info to "get the play right."

The RA only solves that problem when the contact happens inside the RA. And, most of the time the contact is outside, so the problem still exists.

From what I've heard (and, yes, it's somewhat second-hand, I admit), many more calls in near the arc were wrong last year than before the arc in NCAA (M and W). Maybe it's just a learning curve and they'll improve this year. But, as a rule, NCAA officials are "better" than HS officials, and if the NCAA officials have trouble, ....

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

...From what I've heard (and, yes, it's somewhat second-hand, I admit), many more calls in near the arc were wrong last year than before the arc in NCAA (M and W). Maybe it's just a learning curve and they'll improve this year. But, as a rule, NCAA officials are "better" than HS officials, and if the NCAA officials have trouble, ....

This is what I heard directly from a D1 supervisor's mouth.

[tref]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

From what I've heard (and, yes, it's somewhat second-hand, I admit), many more calls in near the arc were wrong last year than before the arc in NCAA (M and W). Maybe it's just a learning curve and they'll improve this year. But, as a rule, NCAA officials are "better" than HS officials, and if the NCAA officials have trouble, ....

Yes it was a hot-topic in May:
http://ncaambb.arbitersports.com/Gro...%20Arbiter.pdf

Reps = success, I'm sure we'll see an improvement this season.

Better
I always thought that "next level" officials were just individuals who were afforded & took advantage of an opportunity that some excellent HS officials have not been provided with, for whatever reasons.

[APG]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Will the NFHS ever go to the secondary defender arc under the basket? If so, when?

In a perfect world, I would hope so.