Missouri State/Wichita State video requests

[BryanV21]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Well, if you want to really break it down that with rule, how did the offense get there first? If spot is defined by the feet being down, were his feet both on the spot?

Fair question, and to be honest I was only looking at the fact that the defender's feet had not gotten to the spot first. A mistake on my part.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

Fair question, and to be honest I was only looking at the fact that the defender's feet had not gotten to the spot first. A mistake on my part.

But you should have a better idea if you are basically trying to convince a room full of people about the rule. A lot of people you are debating with are not rookies or inexperienced officials. And this is not the first time this kind of conversation has been had here. You need to define your position better than this if you feel we are all wrong.

The rule you are referencing is about positioning on the floor, not involving a ball handler. LGP is primarily a rule for contact with a ball handler or airborne shooter and what a player can or cannot to be legal. Even screening rules do not apply to this situation.

Peace

[BryanV21]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

But you should have a better idea if you are basically trying to convince a room full of people about the rule. A lot of people you are debating with are not rookies or inexperienced. And this is not the first time this kind of conversation has been had here. You need to define your position better than this if you feel we are all wrong. The rule you are referencing is about positioning on the floor, not involving a ball handler. LGP is primarily a rule for contact with a ball handler or airborne shooter and what a player can or cannot to be legal. Even screening rules do not apply to this situation.

Peace

Anybody can read a text book to a student, but they are not all teachers. A real teacher will take the facts presented in the text book and form them in a way in which the student understands. JAR did that by addressing the "got to the spot first" part I was hung-up on, whereas others just kept throwing various other rules such as LGP out at me.

Next time, try seeing where the person is coming from, and going from there.

[BryanV21]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

But you should have a better idea if you are basically trying to convince a room full of people about the rule. A lot of people you are debating with are not rookies or inexperienced officials. And this is not the first time this kind of conversation has been had here. You need to define your position better than this if you feel we are all wrong.

The rule you are referencing is about positioning on the floor, not involving a ball handler. LGP is primarily a rule for contact with a ball handler or airborne shooter and what a player can or cannot to be legal. Even screening rules do not apply to this situation.

Peace

BTW, I'm not trying to convince anybody of anything. I'm a fifth year official, who has much to learn (I've actually been told that you never stop learning). I'm sharing my understanding of a rule, which not only tries to help others but gives me the chance to learn as well when others respond.

If the responses I get are not helping me to understand why I'm wrong, then I'm going to continue pressing. If I didn't do that, then I'd be citing a website when explaining a call, rather than citing the rules and how they are properly applied to a situation.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

BTW, I'm not trying to convince anybody of anything. I'm a fifth year official, who has much to learn (I've actually been told that you never stop learning). I'm sharing my understanding of a rule, which not only tries to help others but gives me the chance to learn as well when others respond.

If the responses I get are not helping me to understand why I'm wrong, then I'm going to continue pressing. If I didn't do that, then I'd be citing a website when explaining a call, rather than citing the rules and how they are properly applied to a situation.

Perhaps these two Case plays will help your understanding. They both clearly demonstrate that a defender does not have to have both feet on the court at the time of contact (in fact, a defender could even jump vertically and still draw a charge while not touching the court at all).

10.6.9 SITUATION:

Dribbler A1 has established a straight-line path toward a certain area of the court. Can A1 maintain this specific path?

RULING: Only to the extent that no opponent who is behind or to the side can crowd A1 out of this path. Opponents may attempt to obtain a legal guarding position in A1's path at any time. To obtain an initial legal guarding position, both feet of the guard must be on the court and the guard must be facing the dribbler prior to contact. Time and distance are not factors in obtaining an initial guarding position on an opponent with the ball. Once legal position is obtained, the guard can move to maintain position in the dribbler's path. The requirement of having two feet on the court does not apply in maintaining a legal guarding position, provided the guard maintains in-bound status. (4-23)

4.23.3 SITUATION B:

A1 is dribbling near the sideline when B1 obtains legal guarding position. B1 stays in the path of A1 but in doing so has (a) one foot touching the sideline or (b) one foot in the air over the out-of-bounds area when A1 contacts B1 in the torso.

RULING: In (a), B1 is called for a blocking foul because a player may not be out of bounds and obtain or maintain legal guarding position. In (b), A1 is called for a player-control foul because B2 had obtained and maintained legal guarding position. (4-23-2; 4-23-3a)

[BryanV21]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Perhaps these two Case plays will help your understanding. They both clearly demonstrate that a defender does not have to have both feet on the court at the time of contact (in fact, a defender could even jump vertically and still draw a charge while not touching the court at all).

10.6.9 SITUATION:

Dribbler A1 has established a straight-line path toward a certain area of the court. Can A1 maintain this specific path?

RULING: Only to the extent that no opponent who is behind or to the side can crowd A1 out of this path. Opponents may attempt to obtain a legal guarding position in A1's path at any time. To obtain an initial legal guarding position, both feet of the guard must be on the court and the guard must be facing the dribbler prior to contact. Time and distance are not factors in obtaining an initial guarding position on an opponent with the ball. Once legal position is obtained, the guard can move to maintain position in the dribbler's path. The requirement of having two feet on the court does not apply in maintaining a legal guarding position, provided the guard maintains in-bound status. (4-23)

4.23.3 SITUATION B:

A1 is dribbling near the sideline when B1 obtains legal guarding position. B1 stays in the path of A1 but in doing so has (a) one foot touching the sideline or (b) one foot in the air over the out-of-bounds area when A1 contacts B1 in the torso.

RULING: In (a), B1 is called for a blocking foul because a player may not be out of bounds and obtain or maintain legal guarding position. In (b), A1 is called for a player-control foul because B2 had obtained and maintained legal guarding position. (4-23-2; 4-23-3a)

It does help... thanks. I was simply hung-up on the part about a player needing to get to the spot first.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

BTW, I'm not trying to convince anybody of anything. I'm a fifth year official, who has much to learn (I've actually been told that you never stop learning). I'm sharing my understanding of a rule, which not only tries to help others but gives me the chance to learn as well when others respond.

You told me something I already knew or could tell. And the reason is you are confusing rules situation with each other. LGP is all about what a defender can do to be in the way of a ball handler. Not associated with the "spot" reference you are speaking on.

Originally Posted by BryanV21

If the responses I get are not helping me to understand why I'm wrong, then I'm going to continue pressing. If I didn't do that, then I'd be citing a website when explaining a call, rather than citing the rules and how they are properly applied to a situation.

I cannot speak for why you do not understand something. That might have to do with training, inexperience or reading too much into the rules. Maybe no one has sat you down with video or other training materials, I have no idea. You are only wrong in your reference that the defender that is backing up did not get to a spot. That does not make any since if you ask me. And people have cited you the rule by talking about LGP. If you need the exact location that is a problem too considering that this is in the definitions and I would think someone even with your experience level would know where to easily find that definition.

Since you have no idea, you need to read over Rule 4-23. It even talks about the differences between a player with the ball and a player without the ball and what is allowed when contact occurs.

Peace

[Rich1]

I'm sure my judgement will be harshly criticized (a trend lately in many posts) but I don't have a problem with all three being called blocks. Without the benefit of slow motion the calling official may seen the shooter collect the ball and then the defender slide over so it looked more like a block. In high school I would be morelikely to call this a charge but in ncaa I see all three as 50/50 in real time.

Also, I always try to remember what we see from our angle on the floor is completely different than what the bench, the bleachers, the replay, and even the crew see from theirs. Just because I may see something differently than what was called or what others see in reviewing the tape doesn't necessarily mean I am a better (or worse) official than the next guy.

And, as long as I'm in preach mode, experience doesn't always equal competence so all questions, comments, and opinions should be welcomed in our professional discussions on the forum.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Rich1

And, as long as I'm in preach mode, experience doesn't always equal competence so all questions, comments, and opinions should be welcomed in our professional discussions on the forum.

It is one thing to say I have a judgment difference and try to argue a point based off of an incomplete understanding of a rule. No one is saying anyone at any experience or level should not speak. But it is another thing when you are debating with people giving you a rule and you focus on a small part of a rule that does not focus on the play at hand.

Peace

[BryanV21]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

It is one thing to say I have a judgment difference and try to argue a point based off of an incomplete understanding of a rule. No one is saying anyone at any experience or level should not speak. But it is another thing when you are debating with people giving you a rule and you focus on a small part of a rule that does not focus on the play at hand.

Peace

Two others have been able to explain things. What does that tell you?

Thank you for trying to help, but you're now coming off as condescending.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

Two others have been able to explain things. What does that tell you?

Thank you for trying to help, but you're now coming off as condescending.

A lot of people gave you the actual rules that applied. You were still asking for explanations. What should that tell me?

You can make this about others all you like, but the reality is that you were debating this with many people that not only were disagreeing with you, but have been officiating longer than you. That tells me more. Nothing wrong with being young and confident, but just know who you are talking to in these discussions. This IMO was not even close of a debate based off of rules alone. And we have extensive rules debates on this site as well.

Peace

[ballgame99]

Originally Posted by Rich1

I don't have a problem with all three being called blocks... In high school I would be morelikely to call this a charge but in ncaa I see all three as 50/50 in real time.

Play 1 is a bang/bang play, I thought block when I saw it, but I can see a charge on replay

Play 2 HS charge - NCAAM block - I thought he made a little hop to get his position somewhere between the shooters upward motion starting and leaving the floor. That lateral movement would have been much more pronounced from L (weak running block signal doesn't help sell the call at all)

Play 3 HS charge (all day) - NCAAM - my initial reation was charge, but there may be some slight lateral movement after upward motion began.