Block/Charge - Beating a Dead Horse
 

I am sure this has been beaten to death....but here goes nothing.

A recurring theme this year for me has been watching a lot of plays at the basket where the defender starts to fall backwards before contact. Inevitably, there is some contact, but I have a hard time blowing a block or charge. I have been averaging about 50% no call, 35% block and 15% charge. I am not saying this is right or wrong but the effect is that about 90% of the time, I don't blow right away - my partner is coming in with a block/charge. I have been considering discussing this more in the pre-game. It's my opinion that not every block/charge has to be called if we are consistent.

Has anyone ever thought about your percentages? Is there a good rule of thumb?

Charge (% of time)
Block (% of time)
No Call (% of time)

I don't know my percentages, but I do tend to hit the PC more than other officials. Not overwhelmingly more, but just enough that people know that I'm not afraid to reward good defense.

What interests me is your mention of your partner coming in with a call. Are there calls that you're not making when there should likely be a call? Do you have too slow of a whistle? Are these calls in your primary and your partner is bailing the crew out? Just asking...

In my past two high school games, I've noted I seem to have some issues correctly judging a block/charge.

When might a no-call be appropriate in this situation?

I have never thought about percentages and I think it's kind of silly to do so. I've had games this year where we had a half dozen PC fouls and games where there were many more blocks.

I referee the defense and go from there to try and get the play right. Worrying about the percentages on these calls is a recipe for disaster IMO.

At the HS level I think block/charge is not nearly as difficult as many make it out to be if you referee the defense. In general, if the defense has LGP does what is allowed within the rules then you have a PC or a no call. If he defender is not legal or moves toward or into the path of the offensive player then you have a block. If the defense is legal and not displaced by contact from the offensive player then you have a no call.

Block/charge can get more difficult the quicker, bigger, and more athletic players become at higher levels but the principals are, for the most part, the same.

Thanks VaTerp. I'll give this some thought for my next game.

All I will say is it is a PC foul (charge) until I am proven wrong. I call way more charges than I call blocks. I do call blocks now, but what I find it a lot of players properly get in position after gaining LGP. And when I see these plays on tape, I tend to be right.

Peace

Ignore the fact that the defender faded away a bit. Did they initially get into the path with 2 feet down and facing the opponent? Did they move into the opponents path after their opponent was airborne? Did the offensive player go through them or not? Answer those and you'll know what you should have.

I think at the more junior levels, less experienced officials "bail out" the offensive player by calling a block. IMO it's the easier call. I too like to reward good defense.

Notice that most of these posts are suggesting that you ignore percentages and learn the rule properly. The key to getting block/charge right every time is two steps:

1. Know the rule.
2. Referee the defense, esp. watching for LGP.

Once you've got that, you'll know what you're seeing.

That said, I'll add this about your particular case: the defender who is already falling down — literally on his way to the floor — prior to contact is not going to be disadvantaged by contact, and thus contact will not be a foul.

On the other hand, defenders who have LGP are BY RULE permitted to turn or otherwise move to protect themselves from the contact. If that's what you see, then responsibility for contact will remain with the offense.

You have to judge what you're seeing and make the call.

I'll add this about your particular case: the offense who goes through the defender who was already falling down --- literally on his way to the floor — prior to contact is still going to gain an advantage by contact and has committed a foul.

Fouls are not just about the affect it has on the foulee but the benefit it gives to the fouler. In this case, the shooter took a path that was not available to them...a spot occupied by a defender.

Fading away from contact in now way takes away the defenders right to their spot and they are allowed to do so. It can be one way they protect themselves. Fading away is far different than flinging themselves backwards in an attempt to trick you into calling a foul.

I tend to default to a charge in these plays. IOW, if I can't clearly see what the defender does wrong, he gets the benefit of the doubt. I have no idea how that translates to percentages, but that's going to change from game to game.

I think we had five charges and two blocks last night, but that's not the norm.

The player falling back or protecting themselves does not create a block. They are in LGB and allowed to move backwards. Now the question becomes is it a charge or a no call. Contact would have displaced the defender regardless of the backwards fall/move. CHarge. Contact only displaces defender because of backwards fall/move. No Call.

I have had several games where I did not call a single block. I have had games where the crew did not call a single block and we are talking about 5 calls that all were charges. Not saying that happens all the time, but I think video is helping. I think there was a time when people would call blocks just because. Now that tide seems to have turned to call charges or maybe better training has helped this come true as well?

Peace

I think that we still aren't necessarily (as a collective group, not any individual) refereeing the defense -- I think many officials just take a close block/charge crash and ship it rather than evaluating each play on its own merits.

I think there is a general position to penalize defensive players and never give them the benefit of the doubt. I might be refereeing the defense is a problem, but I tend to think many do not have the courage to call a foul on the offense because they feel they will get more crap. Just like we penalized defensive players in the post when they were held, grabbed and pushed, but when the defense reacts to those things we call the foul on them. The same thing goes for shooters that try to go somewhere they cannot, instead of not calling anything we call fouls on the defenders.

Peace

I would agree that officials tend to penalize the defense more/ give the offense the benefit of the doubt. Part of the issue is that defense so so much less dynamic in terms of movement, balance, etc. There is no manipulative on defense. That I think a lot of officials rightly or wrongly see these dynamic or agility movements the offense makes as finess moves and when contact intereferes they are more likely to call the foul because its obviously interfering with what the player is trying to do. The defense however is just in a balanced stance (in theory) competiting as hard as they can and unless they get knocked down really don't visiblly lose momentum balance they do not have have fine motor skills/footwork to be interuppted. PLay on!

Really? That's how you see it? I really think there are more charges called now than ever -- and many of them should be blocks.

For me it is a charge until the defense makes it not a charge. If it is too close to call I go with the charge as I feel we shouldn't punish the defense for a possible tiny violation of the rules.

I don't get this. It's okay to punish the offense for "a possible tiny violation of the rules"?

I agree about not refereeing the defense but not necessarily about the tendency for officials to just ship it.

The guy who really trained me after I had done mostly intramural ball as an undergrad student really stressed refereeing the defense. I think it is a basic principal that is critical to overall call accuracy, especially on the block/charge.

I don't think its taught enough or fully understood by a lot of officials and associations/training bodies in general.

Many officials, especially newer ones, are concentrating on the ball handler/shooter. So when there is a crash with a defender they have no idea if that defender is legal or not because they never picked them up. So the tendency is to call a block on the player that just showed up in your vision.

Take a play in transition for example. I see many of the officials I observe, especially at the sub-varsity level but too many varsity officials as well, focused on the guy with the ball. What I suggest is to literally shift your vision primarily to the defender and pick up where they are at. Getting in the habit of doing this first then you can expand your vision as you get more experience.

When people understand what refereeing the defense means its much easier to call these plays accurately.

Like it or not there are plays that are too close to know exactally if the defender "got there" or not. Where they there or only 99.8% there? I feel the onus should be put on the offense as I feel they could have taken a better path to avoid the defense.

Does anyone else have a default call when it is "too close to call?"

No, and IMO having a default call is laziness — and I am not saying you're lazy, I have guys in my association in mind.

Know what LGP is and referee the defense. Then you'll know whether contact is a block, charge/PC, or neither.

I don't deny that some plays are close, but IMO there are far fewer of them than many officials seem to think. Usually what seems to them like a close play is one they picked up late and guessed. And even on nut-cutters I do not have a default call.

I did not say in the history of the game. I think there are more charges called because of the usage of video tape. I know at the high school level here we use a lot of tape to show plays and I have seen more charges by partners without a discussion to call more. I do not even share my personal philosophy with partners in pre-game discussions, so something must be happening. I know when I started calling a charge was usually not a common thing when players went to the basket. I also think something in the culture of basketball is changing as you are hearing more "He lowered his shoulder" or "He pushed off" language you never once heard. And when watching college basketball I am saying a lot of charges. Now if you disagree, OK. I just know what I am witnessing in my personal games and watching others in my state. Then again we work a lot of 3 person and 2 person is almost never takes place at least for the varsity level. That might make a difference as we have been beating it in everyone's head who takes the call to the basket and maybe that has helped guys officiate those plays.

Peace

+1

Having a default call or worrying about what percentages of plays you have as charges/blocks/no call is going down the wrong path that leads to essentially guessing at plays and undermines officiating IMO.

Agreed that some plays are close but overall, its really not that hard.

Know the rules and referee the defense!

I have a default, but I find the "nut-cutters" occur less frequently the longer I ref.

I agree! I have had partners tell me that if the defender is falling they are not calling a charge! Oh boy!

How do you decide what to call on a nut-cutter?

I want to make myself clear I do not have a default call for all plays just the "nut-cutters" you describe.

The only thing worse than having a default is calling a play a charge "because a similar play on the other end was called a charge."

jmo

So you say you get ever block-charge play correct then?

Peace

Did I say anything remotely close to that?

Not necessarily, but people use "defaults" so that they can be decisive.

I have said before, that if I have to slow down a video to see if an official got a play right, then I can go with the official's call. Sometimes these plays are so close, I do not have an issue with someone that has a "default" to make a call. And I certainly do not equate it to what some say about, "If we have that call on this end, let us have that same call on the other end." That is crazy because you are not even considering how different the play is you just called. But a personal default might be what you do in a very close situation. I have found that not many plays are that close. It is more of a myth that the block-charge call is the hardest to call in the game when you referee the defense of course.

Peace

I don't see why that helps with being decisive. Default, to me, means this:

Every play will be a charge unless __________ happens.

This, of course, is true. But equally true is:

The play will be a block unless __________ happens.

Plays are frequently labeled as "one that could have gone either way." If this is true, some should indeed go each way. If you have a default, it seems that you would be falsely inclined to lean in one direction on a play that is that close.

We know what LGP is right? So if defenders start legal, they better do something illegal for me to call something on them. It really makes no difference to me what others do, I just think having a default is not crazy or improper. In most cases a player is going to have LGP at some point, whether they maintain it is another issue. Referee the defense then you know.

Peace

I had a pair in a JVB game this week that I no-called, though I'm not entirely sure I was right about them.

Both took place roughly about the free-throw line. Dribbler looked to drive, made contact with fading defender that knocked the defender back a bit, but then the dribbler backed off. Certainly not a block, as the dribbler caused the contact, but was there LGP? I wasn't certain enough to call it, but in hindsight, the balance in RSBQ could have been affected.

Part of the reason, I think, is the conditioning that block/charge typically takes place down low, and I wasn't "ready" to see it. That's certainly on me, and I can always blow the whistle late, but my point is when we think of block/charge, usually it's preceeded by a gather.

Nothing wrong with a default. In fact, that is basically how the rules are written.

The onus is on the defender to defend legally. If they have done nothing wrong when there is contact sufficient for a foul, it is a charge. That is a default. That is also refereeing the defense. You don't have to find something the offense did wrong. All you need to do is know there was foul-sufficient contact and the defender was legal.

Remember, we're talking block/charge, not push offs or hooks. Those are entirely different animals and are not charges.

I had one block-charge tonight and it was a block. So even with a default philosophy, I call the play that is obvious to me. And in this case the defender was coming forward on an airborne shooter. Easy call. And it was a double whistle and my partner had the same thing.

Peace