Flopping to Falling and everywhere in between.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

By moving out of his/her verticality... that's how. Just because one gets LGP, that doesn't mean he/she can then do whatever they want.

I understand that if they fall away from the offense then they are not at fault for the contact, and therefore are not whistled for a foul. But the foul would not be the result of having LGP, it would be the result of the offensive player being the cause of the contact.

They haven't lost LGP just because they "lose verticality". That's not a requirement in the rule.

[Rich]

I'm really not interested in trying to sell a player control foul when a player is already falling backwards well before contact.

No contact, no call. With contact: Block. Don't flop next time, kid.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Rich

I'm really not interested in trying to sell a player control foul when a player is already falling backwards well before contact.

No contact, no call. With contact: Block. Don't flop next time, kid.

You're just a coward, then.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Adam

You're just a coward, then.

I'm not a pioneer, either.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Rich

I'm really not interested in trying to sell a player control foul when a player is already falling backwards well before contact.

No contact, no call. With contact: Block. Don't flop next time, kid.

I go with no call on both. I'm calling a block that isn't.

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by Rich

With contact: Block. Don't flop next time, kid.

Why? What rule do you use to justify this call?

I ask because we have a number of guys in our association who call it this way also - even though the defender is allowed to recoil, turn away, etc in order to lessen the contact.

So I don't get calling a block on a kid who has LGP and starts falling backward so that they don't get put into the hospital.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

Why? What rule do you use to justify this call?

I ask because we have a number of guys in our association who call it this way also - even though the defender is allowed to recoil, turn away, etc in order to lessen the contact.

So I don't get calling a block on a kid who has LGP and starts falling backward so that they don't get put into the hospital.

Since when do I have to justify a block call with a rule citation?

I'm not talking about a kid who fades away slightly as the player comes into him -- I'm talking about a kid who starts falling to the floor when the player is still quite a distance away and causes awkward contact that puts both players at risk.

Lots of big dogs call it this way (and I'm not calling myself a big dog, I'm just repeating what I've heard from NCAA officials who are in a position to tell HS officials how to call plays).

Originally Posted by Rich

I'm really not interested in trying to sell a player control foul when a player is already falling backwards well before contact.

No contact, no call. With contact: Block. Don't flop next time, kid.

Originally Posted by Rich

I'm not talking about a kid who fades away slightly as the player comes into him -- I'm talking about a kid who starts falling to the floor when the player is still quite a distance away and causes awkward contact that puts both players at risk.

Lots of big dogs call it this way (and I'm not calling myself a big dog, I'm just repeating what I've heard from NCAA officials who are in a position to tell HS officials how to call plays).

I agree completely Rich. Especially the bolded parts.

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by Rich

Since when do I have to justify a block call with a rule citation?

I'm not talking about a kid who fades away slightly as the player comes into him -- I'm talking about a kid who starts falling to the floor when the player is still quite a distance away and causes awkward contact that puts both players at risk.

Wasn't asking you to justify it to a coach or player...was asking you to explain your rule basis for calling it that way to me as another official so I could understand your reasoning.

And it sounds like I was simply picturing the play differently (less extreme) than you were.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

Wasn't asking you to justify it to a coach or player...was asking you to explain your rule basis for calling it that way to me as another official so I could understand your reasoning.

And it sounds like I was simply picturing the play differently (less extreme) than you were.

It's been a real issue the past few years. I had one on Friday night where the player fell back so early, the offensive player never made contact and wen't through the space the player once occupied (and over the player who fell to the floor). I no called that, but it could've been ugly.

I'm not saying I expect a player to stay in there and "take a charge like a man," but starting to fall to the floor before contact, while probably not flopping, is really not what's intended by the "absorb contact" or "protect himself" statements, either.

My partner said he told the player that he could call a technical foul for flopping and I encouraged him to not be a pioneer in that area, either.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Rich

I'm not saying I expect a player to stay in there and "take a charge like a man," but starting to fall to the floor before contact, while probably not flopping, is really not what's intended by the "absorb contact" or "protect himself" statements, either.

My partner said he told the player that he could call a technical foul for flopping and I encouraged him to not be a pioneer in that area, either.

Isn't calling a block when it's contrary to the definition of a block also being a pioneer?

[APG]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Isn't calling a block when it's contrary to the definition of a block also being a pioneer?

This isn't a pioneer call...I'd actually venture more officials than not officiate this play just like Rich has talked about.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by APG

This isn't a pioneer call...I'd actually venture more officials than not officiate this play just like Rich has talked about.

Okay, somebody else pioneered it, but my problem is that it has no rules basis.

Call it that way because everybody else does it? Sounds familiar, I guess.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Okay, somebody else pioneered it, but my problem is that it has no rules basis.

Call it that way because everybody else does it? Sounds familiar, I guess.

For me, it's not pioneering if that's the way your bosses want it called. I don't like it, and I don't call it that way; but that's not a hill worth dying on for me.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Rich

Since when do I have to justify a block call with a rule citation?

I'm not talking about a kid who fades away slightly as the player comes into him -- I'm talking about a kid who starts falling to the floor when the player is still quite a distance away and causes awkward contact that puts both players at risk.

How does a defender fading away cause any contact? Seems to me that the offensive player is the one who has caused this contact by continuing to go at the defender in his path. Maybe if we were to properly call charges when they happen, defenders wouldn't fell compelled to fade away so much.