Charging rule

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by potato

Just wondering if Dribbler passed the primary defender & ran into another defender who has been in the zone to defend his own man, will the defender the dribbler ran into be called for blocking since he wasn't there to purposely block the dribbler?

"in the zone"?????

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

"in the zone"?????

He's in the restricted area guarding his own man and the dribbler runs into him. Is this a foul? I think that's what he's asking.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by just another ref

He's in the restricted area guarding his own man and the dribbler runs into him. Is this a foul? I think that's what he's asking.

Not HS, there is no RA. With him I never know what we are talking about.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by potato

Just wondering if Dribbler passed the primary defender & ran into another defender who has been in the zone to defend his own man, will the defender the dribbler ran into be called for blocking since he wasn't there to purposely block the dribbler?

It can't be a charge. that's all. It can be a no-call or a block.

NCAA. Don't know about FIBA.

[potato]

The main reason for RA is to prevent secondary defender from taking advantage by being there early for a charge, but if the so called secondary defender was there to defend his man, won't it be unfair to the defense that he has to make way & get out of position to let the dribbler pass, in this case he not only has to give up his position but also give up defending his man giving him a wide open under basket pass.

won't it be fairer to 1st determine whether the player trying to take a charge was actually there to defend the handler that went pass his primary defender?

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

It can't be a charge. that's all. It can be a no-call or a block.

NCAA. Don't know about FIBA.

[Raymond]

There are restrictions as to when the RA is used. And it doesn't apply in high school or pick-up.

[APG]

Originally Posted by potato

The main reason for RA is to prevent secondary defender from taking advantage by being there early for a charge, but if the so called secondary defender was there to defend his man, won't it be unfair to the defense that he has to make way & get out of position to let the dribbler pass, in this case he not only has to give up his position but also give up defending his man giving him a wide open under basket pass.

won't it be fairer to 1st determine whether the player trying to take a charge was actually there to defend the handler that went pass his primary defender?

The RA doesn't prevent defenders from playing defense (going for a steal, jumping to block the shot, etc.)...nor does it mean the defender has to get out of the way.