block/charge/no call considerations

[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.

[JRutledge]

I would not mind an RA, but I think it would not be officiated properly at the HS level. I just do not find HS officials as a whole to take on rules that have come complex to them and apply them especially at the lower levels. Maybe varsity games and more experienced officials would be OK with this, but I think a lot of two person games would have this play officiated horribly. At least that is my feeling here.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I think it would not be officiated properly at the HS level. I think a lot of two person games would have this play officiated horribly.

Although the block charge is not the most difficult call for me (it's traveling), here in "Two Person Connecticut", having to make the block charge call, especially the block charge that just "pops up" unexpectedly, would be extra difficult if I had to look down for some lines on the court. Just being brutally honest, with you guys, and myself.

[dsqrddgd909]

Originally Posted by jrutledge

i would not mind an ra, but i think it would not be officiated properly at the hs level. I just do not find hs officials as a whole to take on rules that have come complex to them and apply them especially at the lower levels. Maybe varsity games and more experienced officials would be ok with this, but i think a lot of two person games would have this play officiated horribly. At least that is my feeling here.

Peace

+1

[APG]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

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

That may be the reason for some. But then again, there could be, *GASP*, folks that never thought a help defender running in front of the basket for the sole purpose of getting a charge is a "legit" form of defense. Neither school of thought is right or wrong (for debate purposes...obviously in all but NFHS, it ISN'T good defense (save for exceptions).

It is what it is...the RA is here and isn't going anywhere. A generation from now, they'll look back at the RA and wonder how the game was played before it.

I also agree with Rut, that the RA at the high school level is problem a while away...heck we have a hard enough time getting a lot of officials to call it properly in the first place as it is.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

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

Yes, b/c only you and those who agree with you are capable of independent thought.

[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.

[APG]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

Fixed that one for ya...

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

For traditionalist, that may be a great play.

For most other people, they don't consider it a great play for a secondary defender to stand close to the basket for the sole purpose of trying to take a charge. EVERY major rule set except for NFHS agrees so (do they also mention safety reason as well). Now they aren't all uniform in distance or even exact application (FIBA requiring the defender to be completely inside the RA) but they're all on the same wavelength.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by APG

For traditionalist, that may be a great play.

For most other people, they don't consider it a great play for a secondary defender to stand close to the basket for the sole purpose of trying to take a charge. EVERY major rule set except for NFHS agrees so (do they also mention safety reason as well). Now they aren't all uniform in distance or even exact application (FIBA requiring the defender to be completely inside the RA) but they're all on the same wavelength.

And they all sell it as a change for safety...not because the game needed the change to favor the offense. The safety element was only a problem because officials didn't call the game according to the rules.