2013 IHSA 2A Boys' Final...Ballgame99's Plays to Consider

[icallfouls]

flop
flop
no call
no call
charge - offense spread legs so that either leg was on each side of defender then goes through
no call

[canuckrefguy]

Originally Posted by icallfouls

flop
flop
no call
no call
charge - offense spread legs so that either leg was on each side of defender then goes through
no call

You should change your handle to inocallfouls

[VaTerp]

Originally Posted by Adam

I agree with BNR (I would have had the travel).

On #5, I don't think the defender moves into the path, he's already in it and adjusts slightly within the path, so I'm not penalizing him by calling a block.

Agreed.

Originally Posted by icallfouls

flop
flop
no call
no call
charge - offense spread legs so that either leg was on each side of defender then goes through
no call

I'd like to hear rationale for why moving toward and under an airborne shooter resulting in that much contact is a no-call.

Originally Posted by JetMetFan

I got a little skeptical when I saw plays 3 and 6 in real-time because the defender went down as though he was hit by a sniper rifle. I'm not saying they're not PCs but I'm saying I might have passed on them since the force with which he hit the deck didn't seem to match the force of the contact, which would've made me think he flopped.

On #3 there seems like a little embellishment but still clearly a PC IMO. On play #6 it looks like he got rtfo. Not seeing it there.

And for ballgame99 I'd like to know what you see the defender doing wrong to consider blocks on plays #3 and #6. I think you and icallfouls need tutorials on refereeing the defense bases on your responses here.

[canuckrefguy]

Originally Posted by VaTerp

I think you and icallfouls need tutorials on refereeing the defense bases on your responses here.

In all fairness, in many of the plays we are missing the endline camera view, which is extremely valuable. I think the Seth Davis/John Adams block-charge presentation a while back demonstrated that in spades. There were plays on that video that looked like sure-thing PC when they were actually anything but.

I also thought many of the defenders in the video were flopping or borderline flopping. On a couple, the offensive player was definitely initiating, but the defenders were also going down like sacks of hammers with only light to moderate contact.

In that early play that you disagree on the block call, it looks like the defender adjusts after the shooter is airborne - they COULD have just turned to brace for contact, which is legal, but it's tough to tell from the faraway wide angle.

[JetMetFan]

Originally Posted by canuckrefguy

I also thought many of the defenders in the video were flopping or borderline flopping. On a couple, the offensive player was definitely initiating, but the defenders were also going down like sacks of hammers with only light to moderate contact.

To that point, here's something else I just noticed. On plays 1, 3 and 6 - the plays where some of us feel the defender flopped/embellished - it's the same defender all three times: Blue #11. I don't remember off the top of my head whether he was involved in any similar plays earlier in the game but I'd like to think my awareness would've increased on block/charge situations where he was involved.

I had games like that this season where one kid tended to faint dead away when someone got near him/her and it always triggered a discussion with my partner(s) and, sometimes, the player and his/her HC.

[ballgame99]

Originally Posted by VaTerp

And for ballgame99 I'd like to know what you see the defender doing wrong to consider blocks on plays #3 and #6. I think you and icallfouls need tutorials on refereeing the defense bases on your responses here.

I agree that in both 3 and 6 the defenders looked like they did a good job of getting in LGP, so I would be hesitent to go block on those, but I also don't feel like the contact is significant enough to go PC. I like the PC on 6 way better than on 3 (contact is more significant). The only reason I could conceivable call a block on #3 was due to the level of flopping involved. By throwing himself back like that he has created more contact than would have otherwise been there. These are tough calls.

Thanks JetMet for putting those together.

[Pantherdreams]

1- *PC. I feel like he's exaggerating the contact but the offense is also going into/through the chest and position he legally obtained with no attempt to slow up or avoid. Don't want to give him this call but can't let offense just push way to the basket. Different angle or closeup mght tell me more.

2- NC - Ball is released well before contact, contact is minimal and has no impact on the play either way.

3 - No Call - Not enough there to go either way.

4 - Travel

5 - PC collision sends 2 defenders to the deck and is the offenses responsibility.

6 - NC - Shot is already off offense is trying to avoid d. Defender gets grazed and bails out.


All this being said I'm trying to look at each as a stand alone. If there are this many bodies on the floor in and under shooters al game (looks like a lot of flopping going on) by the 3rd or 4th quarter my standard may be impacted in terms of beliving the d is ever there and getting hit. I'm also going to become more sensitive to airborned shooter landing in and on someone who's choosing to go to ground.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by ballgame99

The only reason I could conceivable call a block on #3 was due to the level of flopping involved. By throwing himself back like that he has created more contact than would have otherwise been there.

Disagree. If anything, his legal backward motion reduces contact to the point where a no-call would be acceptable. No way is a block the right call on this.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by icallfouls

flop
flop
no call
no call
charge - offense spread legs so that either leg was on each side of defender then goes through
no call

I can see all of those except the #4.

#4 is a travel anyway you cut it. He moved both feet after he clearly caught the ball. It might be missed in many games, but that doesn't make it not a travel.

#1-3 and #6 are all flops or exaggerations.

In #6, you can, if you slow it down more or pause it at the right time, actually see the defender's entire torso still 100% vertical after the shooter's torso passed by it before the defender even moves. The shooter didn't go through him.

[JetMetFan]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

In #6, you can, if you slow it down more or pause it at the right time, actually see the defender's entire torso still 100% vertical after the shooter's torso passed by it before the defender even moves. The shooter didn't go through him.

That's what I was seeing on #3 and, more so, #6. Not that he has to get RTFO but Blue #11 doesn't move backwards on contact in either of those plays. He actually drops straight down on the spot. The only play where Blue #11 actually moves backwards on "contact" is the flop in #1.

[icallfouls]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

I can see all of those except the #4.

#4 is a travel anyway you cut it. He moved both feet after he clearly caught the ball. It might be missed in many games, but that doesn't make it not a travel.

#1-3 and #6 are all flops or exaggerations.

In #6, you can, if you slow it down more or pause it at the right time, actually see the defender's entire torso still 100% vertical after the shooter's torso passed by it before the defender even moves. The shooter didn't go through him.

#4 - At first glance I did not see the travel, but ok, I think it is a little too close to call a full speed. Give me an ICNC.