Almost blarge

[zm1283]

After seeing it, what are everyone's thoughts about whether it's a blarge or not? The C was clearly going to call a PC foul, no doubt about it. Does the fact that he didn't finish the mechanic change anything?

After seeing it again, I think it's a blarge.

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by zm1283

After seeing it, what are everyone's thoughts about whether it's a blarge or not? The C was clearly going to call a PC foul, no doubt about it. Does the fact that he didn't finish the mechanic change anything?

After seeing it again, I think it's a blarge.

This will probably lead into the "when is a call actually called" argument again...

IMO, since the C did not actually signal anything (yes, he started to), I do not think it was a blarge.

[Tio]

I think you have to administer the blarge. The C is pointing the other way and the L signals block. It is hard to explain your way out of it based on what the tape shows.

From a mechanics standpoint... this is exactly why we preach "slow to show from the outside." Everyone should really be slow to show but I understand why the lead tends to get excited on bang/bang plays.

Additionally when in transition, we should discuss court coverage in pregame. IMO - the lead DOES NOT have first crack at a play outside the far lane line. First shot goes to the C.

After looking at the play, I think a blocking foul is the correct call though.

[Welpe]

I think it's a blarge too. The C is just about to finish hammering it down when he pulls his arm down like he had to suddenly scratch an itch.

Sure can't find a block in that play.

[jeschmit]

Originally Posted by Tio

After looking at the play, I think a blocking foul is the correct call though.

Can I ask you what the defender did wrong there?

[Tio]

If you look at the "top view" near the end of the clip (23 seconds or so), the offensive player makes a move to go around the defender (offense's left) and the defender actually stops, reverses direction and jumps to his right. He does not beat the offensive player to the spot and I have a block.

[HawkeyeCubP]

Originally Posted by Tio

If you look at the "top view" near the end of the clip (23 seconds or so), the offensive player makes a move to go around the defender (offense's left) and the defender actually stops, reverses direction and jumps to his right. He does not beat the offensive player to the spot and I have a block.

This is the only part I disagree with. Bang-bang, but the defender's feet were both on the ground at that new-ish spot before the shooter's foot leaves the floor, IMO.

[HawkeyeCubP]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

Agreed...for some reason the L reaches across on plays like this quite often in NCAA-M games. I really don't get it.

True. That.

[VaTerp]

Originally Posted by zm1283

And if it's the same one I'm thinking of, they got it wrong too. They conferred and gave it to Purdue. The replay showed Purdue's player caused it to go OOB.

They did get it wrong but Steratore actually had it right initially. If I remember correctly it was an odd play where the lead came across with his hand up, seemingly asking for help. Steratore emphatically pointed the other way then the L indicates possession would stay on this end of the floor.

They got together and end up going with the Ls call but replays showed that was wrong. Whole thing seemed odd the way they handled it.

As for this play, Steratore absolutely needs to give the C the first crack at this.

[JetMetFan]

Originally Posted by HawkeyeCubP

This is the only part I disagree with. Bang-bang, but the defender's feet were both on the ground at that new-ish spot before the shooter's foot leaves the floor, IMO.

I have a PC. The defender maintained LGP. He was moving backwards at the point of contact and A1 had not left the floor on his try attempt.

[Tio]

That is the beauty of this! To each is entitled his own opinion.

That being said, the fact that he has to jump back and is does not beat the offensive player to the spot seals the deal. But, if you watch the real-time play it is close. The top-view at the end of the clip provides the best angle.

[Camron Rust]

I'm not so sure he ever had 2 feet down while in the path and facing the offense. At the moment he had 2 feet down, he wasn't facing the opponent but was turned sideways. He stepped back to turn and face the opponent but that foot didn't make it to the floor before contact.

It is extremely close, however.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by zm1283

And if it's the same one I'm thinking of, they got it wronIfg too. They conferred and gave it to Purdue. The replay showed Purdue's player caused it to go OOB.

If the Lead had asked for help or had Steratore let the Lead make his call first then brought him the info I believe they would have ended up getting it right.

These 2 plays illustrate 2 situations that should be part of our pregames.

[JetMetFan]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

I'm not so sure he ever had 2 feet down while in the path and facing the offense. At the moment he had 2 feet down, he wasn't facing the opponent but was turned sideways. He stepped back to turn and face the opponent but that foot didn't make it to the floor before contact.

It is extremely close, however.

Fair point. So the question could be do these qualify as two feet and facing. They're all roughly the same moment, just from different angles.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by JetMetFan

Fair point. So the question could be do these qualify as two feet and facing. They're all roughly the same moment, just from different angles.

...and in the path...if you're not in the path, you're not even guarding, much less having legal guarding position.

Assuming you consider it in the path, the question that would answer that would be whether you would have called a block or a charge if the defender was just reaching that position simultaneous with contact. I don't think I've ever seen a charge called when a defender arrives and takes contact while still turned like that and takes the contact from the direction where the opponent is...he would have run into the side of his shoulder.

Unrelated, those angles show that the L has the most open view of that play while the C had to deal with #1 crossing his line of sight.