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

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/H2TPnCrSX9Y?rel=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

1: flop
2: block
3: good PC
4: TRAVEL. Apparently HS refs let this travel go all the time. It is ruining the game.
5: PC
6: Good PC

Got to call the crashes when a team's strategy is to draw charges. Contact to the shoulder does not make the defender any less legal.

Agree on all but 5, I think Blue 22 readjusted his position (sliding slightly to his left) while White 21 was in the air. Block, but I probably would not catch it real-time.

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.

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.

The last two plays go towards the consistency factor I mentioned in the other play string. To have nothing on #5 then come back 35 seconds later and have a call on #6 probably had both benches on edge. Also, the no-call on #2, combined with two of the block/charge no-calls in the other play string in the first half. Again, the crew had a problematic night dealing with airborne shooters.

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 :D

Agreed.

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

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.

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.

I agree with everyone but #4, only because it is an issue to me when he controls or gathers the ball. I think I would pass on this play as tight as it is. Only on replay would have have real doubt.

Peace

More news:

Seton-Harrisburg: Bitter end still isn't in sight - chicagotribune.com

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.

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.

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.

#6 whistle way before charge call? did trail possibly have contact on intial drive?

The endline camera is valuable but I don't think we need it on these plays. The Davis/Adams video had plays that were much closer IMO than the ones here. And I think video is a great tool for all of us and I try to use it for my own evaluation whenever possible. 99% of my games have no endline camera view yet I think I'm still able to grade accuracy fairly well.

I'm not seeing the flopping that some others are seeing. Play #2 was a flop and correctly no-called. On play #3 there may be a little embellishment by the defender but there is significant contact to the defender's upper body and not what I would consider a flop, or really even close to a flop.

Not sure which play you are talking about here. I'm guessing #2 or #5. #2 was a no call that was clearly a block IMO as the defender never had LGP and moved toward and into the path of the airborne shooter.

#5 I think Adam hit it on the head in that the defender was legal and maintained it even with the adjustment. And disagree that it's tough to tell with the angle we have here.

Agree again. I don't see that as a flop, let alone enough of one where I would make up a rule and call a block. ;)

Nope...don't worry about the timing of the whistles/commentary. I just noticed the audio & video are out of sync (I tend to watch these with the sound down). My apologies that I didn't pick up on that as I was creating the clips otherwise I would've just muted all the sound.

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.

have to be a subscriber to read :(

hmm -- i'm not a subscriber and I read it.

As did I.

I got the same error message. Wonder if it's cause I read some other articles there last week.

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.

I think the audio was off. I had several of the plays where I heard the whistle well before the contact but the visible signals from the officials were after.

Yeah, Jetmetfan mentioned it another thread. Let's get a new AV guy:D

You can sign up for a free Digital membership. That's how I read it.

Hey...make it a 3-man crew with me and APG and increase the fee :D

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.

#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.

I noticed that too. Thought it could have been an editing glitch or something. Since there was not a double whistle -- it went "whistle", "contact", "PC signal" -- I think it was the lead that blew the whistle. If the trail had something, we would have heard a second whistle from the lead. Also, the baseline view (starting at 2:04) has the train in the background during the drive and there appears to be no call from that offial.

Is it possible that the lead had a quick whistle/touch foul on the drive, but after seeing the collision, went with the more obvious contact?

Irrespective of what the calls were or should have been, and this being only the first quarter, this game looks like it is a steaming locomotive that is heading about to turn into a runaway from the crew.

When I see both players go down after multiple crashes and no whistles being put on the play, my first thought is that the crew just wasn't mentally prepared to work the game -- or that they were a bit overwhelmed with the assignment.

I could be wrong, of course, but that's my first reaction.

My first reaction is something that has happened to me. You let the first B/C go as a NC. Then next one is at other end and if you call it you will have one of coaches (regardless of call) complain that you did not call it at other end, so you make another NC for "consistency" rather than admitting that a mistake was made first time. In this game it looked like they were "consistent" about 8 times, which makes them "consistenly wrong" 8 times.

To be consistently wrong on your judgement does not make for good "consistency". It makes for a train wreck of a game. I'd rather be NOT consistent and wrong that one time than allow things to get out of hand.

Either way, most times, and irrespective of the situation one coach won't be happy.

I understand deecee's response but I think you're right, LeeBall. It really appears as though they whiffed on the first block-charge (in the other thread) and that started the ball rolling down hill. Once it started it was tough to stop. If they get the second one, right or wrong but hopefully right, at least it puts everyone back into the mindset of "okay, let's call these."

Reflecting on the last call to make the call at hand is at best, unnecessary. See the play. Make the call. Consistency should take care of itself.

Play #1: PC. Clear displacement. That wasn't a flop.
Play #2: Block. Regardless, you gotta have a call there when the shooter is wiped out.
Play #3: No call, but I see why he did it. If the lead stepped in, I think he would have seen it differently.
Play #4: Travel all day long. A couple of years ago our State Sup of Officials - who was also a long-time college official - went over spins and says in the HS game if the dribbler tries to spin that 9 times out of 10 it's going to be a travel. He's probably right.
Play #5: PC. Does the shooter have to sit on the guy's face before a whistle's blown?
Play #6: PC, good call. Enough contact was inside the torso in order to justify it, unlike play #3

Play #2 - combined with a similar play in the previous video post on this game - may be the most baffling. Two airborne shooters get wiped out by kids under the hoop who don't have LGP and there's not even a thought of a whistle? Some of the others you can see where they might have been missed but those two plays were train wrecks that any one of them could've called and nobody would've complained. That's what makes you wonder whether everyone's head was in it from the start.

I think the two of you are in agreement.