Charge
 

This play exemplifies all that is wrong with BB. Everybody wants to see a great dunk. So three officials stand there and watch as a guy runs over a defender. I know, I know, no one wants to be the guy who comes out and waves this one off. But we have to...

High Schooler's Unbelievable Dunk Is Viral Video Gold - Yahoo! News

What's your point? What do you want us to do about this play?

So first all officials don't call travelling. Now all officials don't call block/charge plays involving dunks?

Without slowing that down to frame by frame I can't tell that the defender has finished sliding sideways to get to his position before the offensive player leaves the ground. Plus the offensive player pretty much jumps completely over the defender. In my opinion a no call is the right call.

And the secondary defender might have been in the arc and it looks like he also might have been moving forward (not that he wouldn't have taken some contact if he didn't but moving forward puts the burden on him)

I beg to differ on his one. If you stop it at the 0:06 mark A1's knee is in B1's face. From the angle you can't tell whether the defender obtained LGP but I agree with the premise of the OP: there should have been a whistle on this one way or another. This isn't incidental contact.

Bob, this is a H.S. game so the RA isn't in effect...or at least it shouldn't be.

I agree that there needs to be a call here, but I could easily see myself in awe of what happened there and unable to blow the whistle.

Hard to tell for sure from the angle of the camera, but just going off of that, I have a blocking foul.

I had this last year. Fast break, defense gets position just on the lane line, offense jumps for the dunk. When the contact happens, the offensive players knee hits the defense in the chest, and he finishes with a dunk. Waved it off and had a charge. The entire gym went nuts with the dunk, and I am going the other way. It was great to hear everybody boo me, but it was an easy call.

According to drofficial you don't exist.

Agreed this is not incidental contact. I'd have a whistle here, as well. I'm calling a block. You have to slow it down due to the camera angle, but the defender is still sliding over after the shooter takes off (or as he's taking off, perhaps).

It looks as if the shooter's knee (after getting some face), lands on the defender's shoulder and then he gets further elevation from the defender's shoulder.

Still ... this is just ... wow.

It was crazy. Dude just kept going up. My partners were like, did you see that. Even his coach knew it was a charge. He told me that he couldn't believe I actually called it, but it was right.

Even if the defender doesn't have LGP, how is this any different than a dribbler elbowing his defender on the way to the basket? Be it an elbow or a knee, it's an outstretched limb (and the joint, to boot).

Block, charge, or no-call?
 

Can't really see whether defender's feet are completely outside the semi-circle - but let's assume they are.
Whatcha got?

<iframe src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/MerJpZw7Puk" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" width="560"></iframe>

And that's also applies to secondary defenders in the RA in college.

PC in a Fed game.

Not sure about NCAA, as I believe this would be a secondary defender with a foot in the RA - which I think if anything, means a block.

The little shift by B1's left foot doesn't change the torso position, which remained stationary when LGP was established.

Player Control, and the RA doesn't matter under NFHS rules.

My mistake on that. I just saw the court and didn't pay attention to the teams or wording on the link.

Threads merged since they both talked about the same play, and the longer thread already has discussion about the call/no call. Thank you to canuckrefguy for embedding.

High school: PC.

Charge ...
 

In my NFHS games, player control foul.

http://ts1.mm.bing.net/th?id=H.50316...h=141&c=7&rs=1

I have a Hurdling Foul, 15 yards and reply the dunk attempt.

I can live with the no call on this as the contact took place mostly after the dunk. So to me the contact is mostly incidental as it did not prevent the dunk from happening and the play was basically over. I guess I can see a block or charge call here, but I would need another look or angle to see if the defender was not moving sideways when the player went airborne.

Peace

Hogwash. The only contact after the dunk was B hitting the ground after being illegal contacted.

Hogwash?

The contact or the action that put the player on the floor mostly took place after the ball was through the hoop. If you want to come in and say that is a foul, fine. I can see why it was not called and it might have been the judgment of the official that this was going to be a block and called nothing because the play was completed. Which would have made it incidental contact by rule if no one was put at an disadvantage.

Peace

I am really not looking for your approval either way. And I do not need to color the font to make that statement. ;)

Peace

Thanks for that.

You are the one that was all puffy about my opinion. ;)

Peace

Hogwash = puffy? lol In NE Illinois, I guess it is.

LOVE the blue font! :)

I have illegal contact above the shoulders by A1. It appears that B2 may have a possible concussion. Wave off the basket and I have an intentional foul on A1. :D

Well no one uses Hogwash where I am from. They use stronger language. Then again, I honestly could give a damn what you think on this and many plays.

Call your game and I will call mine.

Peace

If that was me in the Lead I probably would have called a Block. Then I would have seen the tape and I say I got the play wrong.

Of course, I'm what's wrong with basketball officiating in this nation.

Officiate the defense...very very close, but looks like a block to me. Defender doesn't establish LGP before the shooter jumps. Add a little bit of shoulder nudge by the defender and that seals it for me. Then again, I had the benefit of watching it 6 times before making 'my call'.

That is why I would likely no call this. The defender did not keep the dunker from completing the dunk. So no advantage. Rule 4-27 always comes to mind on these kinds of plays.

Peace

Good thought.....thanks for the reference.

What's Next ??? A Poll ???
 

The infamous blue font, and a "NE Illinois" reference, in the same thread. We are really getting to be wild and crazy Forum members.

If the defender is late getting there, and I think he is, I agree with the no call. Hasn't the poor kid suffered enough?

Dunkin Donuts ...
 

I'm confused about this play, and I'm at work and don't have my books. In the case of a dunker, is the ball dead when it passes through the hoop, or does the ball remain live until the airborne shooter returns to the floor?

I talked to Joey Crawford and he emphatically signaled "BLOCK" :)

insert joey's excessive celebration video <here>

It is dead, but for the purpose of a personal foul, by or against an airborne shooter, it doesn't matter.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/UdMMYz0fKpI" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

^^ All sorts of awesomeness wrapped up that clip right there, the least of which is the look of disbelief on the Black Python's (or whatever his nickname is) face.

Assuming secondary defender, the lead (who you wouldn't know is even alive) is straightlined and only comes to life to gather the ball after it bounces past him.

Who cares about the players?...gotta get that ball!!

Even in college with the RA this could have been called a charge for leading with the knee.

Fouls and Penalties. 10-1.12.

be called a player-control foul.

I honestly do not care about the ball being dead or that aspect of the play from my point of view. The play by all accounts is over if you feel the defender was not in a LGP and the action did not prevent the dunker from landing properly or be under control and certainly did not prevent the dunk. For me this is simply an issue of advantage, disadvantage after you have determined the actions by the defender were legal or not as it relates to taking a charge. And this play is very, very close and not a slam dunk (pun intended) either way. And I call more charges personally than I bet most people here call them. I did see an angle today on ESPN from a half-court that did not help in determining for me if the defender slid over while the player went airborne. If you deem the defender was in a LGP, I am not even convinced I would call a foul that way either as the defender was not really displaces during the actual action but after the dunk as he has someone under him.

Peace

I am going to disagree with that last point, the player was dunking. He was not leading with anything and if this was an NCAA game, this is if anything a block because of the RA rules. He jumps over the guy, not leading with his leg or anything. The guy is in a place he is not supposed to be in those rules and why they came up with the RA in the first place, to prevent players from standing under the basket just to cause contact. And why I would be OK with a change in the NF rule for that very reason. The problem is those plays are so rare at the high school level it would be hard to justify a change.

Peace

I agree that this would not apply. Some body part has to be in the lead, and in this case it was the knee, but I see nothing unnatural about it.

I'm replaying and freezing with my play-cursor at about 5.75 seconds and the ball is still in the shooter's hand and the knee to the jaw/chest has just happened and the defender is already moving backward from the contact.

Is he moving laterally while the player was in the air?

Peace

Possibly, but I don't think definitively from the camera's view (defender's teammate is largely blocking the camera's view of the defender's feet). My point was simply that the shooter's knee to the defender, causing the defender to be moved backward and knocked down, happened before the ball was released/was in the basket - and that I don't see any other contact.

Not disputing the contact with the knee, but the movement of the legs were not unnatural or trying to create contact with the legs to get a foul. I do not equate this like a forearm shove to create space to make a play or get a shot off. It just looks to me from live that the defender slid over. Yes he might have been backing up slightly, but he cannot move into the shooter if he is airborne. As I said it is very close, but even with that contact it is not egregious to warrant an automatic foul from me either way.

Peace

Hello... :D

Hmm, don't think you're quite right on that one. Observe the point of contact:

http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l5...psd0499e29.jpg

http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l5...ps98886cd2.jpg

The guy basically takes a knee to the face, which is why he's down for the count after the dunk.

Full speed, I think the defender is late.

So I have no problem with a no-call - seems cruel on this specific play for the guy to get plowed in the face, get dunked on, AND take the foul :D

Nothing in the rule says that getting hit in the face is an automatic foul. Just like it would not be with an elbow if a player is legally doing what they are allowed to do. So getting hit in the face is not a good reason to simply call a foul.

Peace

Better answer:

"You know, you're right...I said the contact took place after the dunk, and I was clearly wrong."

No, contact in itself is not a foul. Again there are rules at play here, not some issue of when or if contact took place.

Peace

:rolleyes: Whatever.

So you call a hand-check at the moment of contact? Or do you call a hand-check when the contact displaces or moved the ball handler? RSBQ anyone?

The issue is not when contact first took place, it is when the contact displaced the player.

And if this upsets you, then when you work your games you stop the tape and then look at different angles and make a call. For the rest of us we will get one shot at the call and decide when contact caused displacement. And the issue of a knee hitting someone is the most irrelevant part of this discussion honestly. I guess we are going to penalize him because he can jump? :rolleyes:

Peace

Whatever.

You said the contact happened after the dunk.

The video clearly shows otherwise.

And you still won't say your comment was incorrect.

Not gonna split hairs with you, because I know you'd rather disembowel yourself with a spoon than admit you made a mistake. Even though I agreed with your ultimate application of the rules.

I'm done.

Whatever.

OK, then the displacement did not take place until after the dunk. Is that better? Does that make you feel better. And the fact you are worried about such a minor point tells me everything I need to know (while you agreed with my take on the play). Some people love to be so childish on this site sometimes.

Peace

You're really stretching it here to justify your earlier statement.

No matter how you slice it the potentially fouling contact was well before the ball was through the hoop.

It may be the case that a lot of officials will not call that a foul but such a stance is not rules based....the defender did everything they needed to do to draw the charge (assuming they were there in time...and if they were not, it should have been a block).

I think it is a stupid point to make to show a graining video to try to prove when contact did or did not take place. Fouls are by rule caused by displacement, not the exact moment of contact.

Again people. If you want to call a foul here by my guest. And why you call a foul is also up to you. Life is too short to try to do things for why others do things. My judgment will be judge on its own merits and I am OK with that.

Peace

Defender looks to have been displaced!

the offense did not ever have head and shoulders past the defender, therefore the onus is on the offense to avoid contact, unless the defender moved forward - which could be the case here. you have to determine when/if the defender ever had LGP - LGP exists any time a defender is facing and has both feet on the floor and can be from any distance. the offense appears to have gone through the defender with heavy contact.

in HS it does not matter if the ball went through or entered the basket, you can still have a player control foul regardless.

the defender is in the path of the shooter prior to the shooter leaving the floor.

the knee is not relevant as most dunks/layups of this nature, starting off one foot, has the knee in this position.

i would be curious to know what the crew talked about - no one put a whistle on this play ;)

Again, was he legal? He has to be in a legal position to have a foul in his favor.

Still more inclined to not call anything on this play at all levels I work.

Peace

"After The Ball Went Through The Hoop" ???
 

So does JRutledge's statement, "The contact or the action that put the player on the floor mostly took place after the ball was through the hoop" really make any difference in interpreting this play?

If I have the defender where he needs to be and there's a knee in the face -- that's going to have me shipping it the other way.

If the defender isn't where he's supposed to be, I'm calling a block.

Knee in the face + player going down hurt + player possibly stepping on the defender does not equal "nothing" in my game.

No

Only for people that like to make up their own rules.

I guess 4-27 is not a rule? Or is it because you do not like people that do not agree with you? ;)

Something tells me the latter.

Peace

So why bother allowing a personal foul on contact with an airborne shooter after the ball is through the basket.

That has nothing to do with the timing of the contact relative to the time that the ball goes through the hoop....which is the point being discussed even though it wasn't even what happened either.

I do not disagree the timing of the contact is really irrelevent. I think this should not be a call. I want a little more contact than that to have a foul honestly. If he did not want someone to jump over him, go further out from the basket. If the contact was lower on his body than maybe.

Peace

Anything can happen.


A1 has a breakaway, pursued by B1. Just inside the free throw line, B1 makes a desperate lunge to attempt the strip. He slips and goes to the floor and catches a knee in the face. A1 stumbles slightly, then rights himself and completes the layup. B1 remains on the floor.

Perhaps an official's timeout, but otherwise this sounds like it could easily be a no call.

If anyone evaluating here watched us no-call this, there would be an a** reaming after the game. I can't even take you seriously anymore. You take the opposite side of stuff like this just to entertain yourself.

You must not have much experience with Rut. He doesn't care what anyone else calls or doesn't call in their games (Or so he says), but he'll spend hours on here being the contrarian and arguing with people about why he's right and they're wrong. We don't all have the wisdom and experience he does, just ask him.

In the words of Dave Hester: "Yeeeeep"

You don't like people who don't agree with you, which is evident by the fact that you spend a good amount of time arguing with everyone when you're the only dissenting opinion. Even after you were proven wrong about the play being over before the contact, you still held firm.

For the record, I would probably have a PC foul here. Even if I called a block, I would feel better about it than having no whistle at all just because it might upset everyone watching the pretty dunk.

This is called "figjam". I'll let you figure out what the letters stand for.

It's pretty clear that all productive talk on this play is long over.

It's a new forum rule ... whenever someone agrees with you they have to put it in the blue font.

Makes it easier to find in the thread with no worries about having blue everywhere, since it doesn't happen very often.

:) :) :)