ESPN High school game Block Charge
 

Montverde Fl vs. Simeon Il- about 2:10 left in the 3rd quarter. Can the magical person who can pull video from a hat and post it? The official had a block, I had an easy peasy PC.

I'm certain of one thing at this point. One of you was wrong.

Agree that one of you was wrong...
 

.... and it sure as hell wasn't you!

Hopefully APG (or I) can post this play later but...

It was a PC. I watched the play four extra times to try to figure out what the Montverede defender did wrong and couldn't find anything.

For those who haven't seen it: Three-person crew and it was a transition situation. The L made the call. The defender was standing on the opposite lane line a little more than halfway up the lane when contact was made.

I've gotten into the habit of once a fast break is starting that, as the L, I start to zero in on the defenders and officiate the defense prior to the offensive player(s) getting there. "Coach, I saw it all the way."

<iframe width="853" height="480" src="https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/fxHIPYbznzM" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

That's what happens when the L reaches all the way outside the lane in front of the C = he misses the call. :(

He must have thought the little hop lost B's previous LGP.

I've got a PC all the way.

Did the C call anything?

I watched it again to check location -- yup, that's one that the C has to get in transition.

Lead is pretty much straight-lined. When you reach across the lane from lead like that, this is the result.

This is a PC and not even close — not sure how anyone could even debate it (although I will not be surprised if someone does).

This is an easy, easy, easy call if you are watching the defense. Don't even understand how we can miss calls like this one. Get the easy ones because you are sure to miss a couple of the tough ones!!

While I agree he missed it, the defender was actually in the lane (at least partially), not outside of it as some are suggesting.

Also The lead had no worse of an angle than the C....who was straightlined just as bad from the reverse angle. It was a secondary defender that came from within the lane and was the only defender the lead had to worry about while the C had another defender coming in with the shooter.

I don't know what he saw, but the lead had as good of a view as anyone on that play.

Not only that, he had two fouls... one for each fist up.

False double imo

CR, I disagree. Yes, he's a secondary defender but he also was the only defender to contest the shooter. Both the C and the L have a clear look - the only player who could've possibly gotten in the C's way was Black #11 and it doesn't appear as though he does.

Last but not least, the crash was in the C's primary. The L needs to let the C get that first. If there's no whistle make a call but at least give the guy a chance. By the same token the C needed to be ready to make that call. If he's looking ahead of the play, which he should've been since neither the initial dribbler nor the player who ended up with the ball had a defender on them for most of the play, he sees B1 and gets ready for what might happen.

One of my first thoughts watching the play was it was a two-person call made in a three-person game.

+1

But that C looks like he's jogging when the play develops. He needs a little more hustle on that play.

I wonder do officials in many cases even know what "Referee the Defense" is? This was not even close.

Peace

Agreed that with the location of the play, the center should have first shot at the play. The lead is blowing as if it were his primary. Second, he was obviously not refereeing the defense or simply guessed at the play.

BTW - what is up with the weird official's jerseys?

If they don't come out with new shirts every few years, how do you expect any of the supply companies to make any money?

Besides, we need a way to identify the elite officials, not just those wearing regular stripes.

:)

So True...they look like old NBA jerseys. I am hanging on to my old collared shirts for when they come back in style. :)

Well this is in transition, there is no "primary" at that time. He could blow this and I would expect him to have a call, but I think he did not referee the play properly if he cannot identify a clearly stopped and standing defender.

Peace

What's with those NBA issue officiating shirts?

Those look like the shirts the state final officials in Texas have been wearing.

We use those shirts, or a similar one made by Smitty, for all of the high level AAU I do for one of my assignors. I actually like the fit and look of them much better than the traditional black and whites I have.

As for the call, I agree with some previous observations that in transition I think the L has just as good a look if not better than the C on this play. He should have been refereeing the defense and had an easy PC on this one.

Also, the C does seem to be too slow to accelerate at the beginning of the play but not sure if he caught up or not and what kind of angle he ended up with or if he had a whistle as well.

That looked like a pretty easy player control foul to me! wonder if coach was going bonkers?

Not necessarily passing judgement with this statement: it looks as though the new L made the blocking call "on the run", whereas, the C seemed to be hustling to the play and was in the proper position. He was on the move too, but was moving in the same direction as the play. The L was moving towards the baseline while looking over his shoulder more or less to make the call.

I don't get your point. A lot of us do this several times a game and have to make the decision to 1) make a call, 2) make the necessary position adjustments to keep from getting stacked or 3) don't make a call because it would be guessing.

Can we agree that it is possible to run to a position and see that a defender is standing in one spot? If so, even though the official was stacked, he should have see the offensive player go to and thru the defender. I look at this as not using sound play-calling mechanics: did the defender obtain LGP, was the defender in the offensive player's path, did the defender maintain LGP, etc.

Hey, we all get plays wrong and this one would surely be graded IC.

Just an innocuous observation. Could it have affected the calling official's ability to see the play? Maybe. He's probably a much better official than me, though. In any event, I agree with your assertions. Although, I'm always more comfortable assessing block/charge action when I'm more or less standing still. Not always a luxury we have, though, as you mentioned.

Just putting this out there...
 

Regarding who should have what on this play, here's the citation from the NFHS Officials' Manual on transition coverage:

I'm not too upset with the speed at which the C moved with the play. At the point of contact he was at the top of the FT circle which is within the range a C can cover when play is in the half court. Regardless, L shouldn't have been first whistle on this.

Exactly.

Worked a game last week where we had several blocking fouls against one team. Coach asked each one of us (after different fouls) why they were blocks.

Each of us answered that the defender moved forward after the offensive player went airborne. Easy to see if you go through the progression, as you mentioned.

My 2 cents
 

I'm very comfortable with the L making the call here. If you look at this entire play, he has one defender that will make this play difficult and it's the kid who attempts to take the charge.

The C doesn't have a better look than the L and I would say has a slightly worse look.

From the angle of the camera, it looks like a player control, 100%. However, it could have been that the defender leaned his upper torso into the pathway of the offensive player and we can't see that from this angle.

So I'm not so quick to judge Incorrect Call from this limited angle. With that said, I didn't like that the L was late at arriving to the spot and never got settled to receive the play.

Don't they always?

You're correct. His right foot is in the lane.

But 95% of his body is outside the lane, the play is coming from the C and the L misses the call.

He has no business blowing this play.

And yet, he still misss the call.

I do not think his positioning has anything to do with missing this call. I think he did what a lot of people do, penalize the defense even when they do nothing wrong.

Peace

While that maybe true, 9x out of 10 when I see the L reach across the lane like this, he misses the call.

That is why I say this is transition, there are times you have to help each other out. I have seen a lot of missed block/charge situation that had nothing to do with calling across the lane. I just think he did not referee the defense and it is that simple in my mind.

Peace

bkt, you would rather go with a no call then have the lead come across the lane?

I remember talking to an NBA official about this — they did a study that confirmed your numbers ... 80-90% of the time the lead was wrong when the reached like this.

Yes.

C needs to get it or no one ... and he can take the heat if he doesn't have a call.

No call >>>>> the wrong call.

Not my position. Someone needs to get this, just get it right.

Peace

i dont agree either. i cant see anyway for there to be a no call on this play. yes, the l got it wrong, but i dont think it is because he was straight lined or because he didnt have a good look at the play, i just think he got it wrong. happens to the best of them or adams wouldnt have so many plays to put on his block/charge videos every other week or so.

So...

Right call >>> No call >>> Wrong call

I mean, that IS the preference, isn't it? I mean, of course if the L gets it right there is no issue! :)

Again you call it the way you want, but not what I have ever been told by anyone and not that way in transition. This is not the typical play where we have primary coverage and the C is often further away from the lane or their normal position. And I have always been told that if bodies are on the floor we better know how they got there. This contact has to be called no matter where the contact came from.

Peace

Amen.

Actually, based on what I posted earlier from the NFHS Officials' Manual, it is. This wasn't a quick turn off of a steal. It was a run-of-the-mill transition play and based on where contact took place it was the C's call to make since it was on his side of the floor.

Yes, there are times you have to help your partner out in transition or not but you at least have to give your partner a chance to make the call. The L didn't give his partner a chance in this case.

I would argue that we can see something like this better from the camera angle than the L can from behind the defender. That's why the C is supposed to take plays like this that originate on their side of the floor. They can see a lean-in, if there is one. The only other person who would be able to see it properly would be the T.

i still disagree. as the lead, i am giving the c a chance to make this call, if he doesnt i am making my call. sure there is a chance i will get i wrong, just like there is a chance i will get some of the other calls i make that night wrong as well. does it suck when we get the call wrong as is clearly the case here, it sure does, but if the coach or assignor or evaluator asks me about the play i can tell him, as i am sure the l in this play thought, i had the defender sliding in after the player went airborne. how are you going to justify not having a call on a violent collision like this at the basket if asked.......it wasnt my primary coverage area so i passed. i think that is a much weaker position than stating why you called the play a particular play and then admitting/accepting you got it wrong if it turns out that way.

Even in situations where we have been asked to not call across the lane, they do not want a no call for sure. The complaint is that the lead does not rotate, not that they simply miss the call. And "It wasn't my primary" is usually not going to go over well with the people I work for either. And again, this is transition, the Lead just got to the end line.

Peace

i think you and i agree on this jrut, i am saying there has to be a call on this play and if it has to come from the lead so be it. no way this play can be justified as marginal or incidental contact, and no way can lead claim he didnt have a look at the contact.

and since we both work for many of the same assignors at hs and college level it isnt suprising that we would be in agreement.

True.

Peace

I think it is a transition play, but I think the L could have a cadence whistle on this play. The signal is telling me that the L wasn't really sure of this call.

I still think this is just a case of using bad play-calling mechanics. I agree with Rut when saying we have to know how players get to the floor and this is not a play where a no call is the right call.