Block/Charge thoughts (video)

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Depends on the definition of "secondary defender". On the Men's side, all outnumbered defensive players on a fast break are secondary defenders. I don't know how NCAA-W handle it.

That's why I'm asking #3.

Originally Posted by SWMOzebra

We use the same definition. A double whistle would have been ideal here, but as the drive is from Cs primary it's his call.

Assuming BNR's quote is correct, then the NCAAW is different.

Art. 2. In a fast-break situation, any defensive player(s) initially shall be a
secondary defender.

Either way, though, I think this is primarily for the RA rule and not necessarily for the "whose call is it?" discussion.

[JugglingReferee]

Textbook PC.

1. No.
2. I definitely don't.

[johnny d]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Assuming BNR's quote is correct, then the NCAAW is different.

Art. 2. In a fast-break situation, any defensive player(s) initially shall be a
secondary defender.

Either way, though, I think this is primarily for the RA rule and not necessarily for the "whose call is it?" discussion.

You are correct, this definition is used to decide PC/block plays in regards to the RA on fast breaks. However, the favored philosophy on the men's side is that L is primary on all such plays in the paint, going to the basket involving secondary defenders regardless as to where the play originated or whether or not the RA is involved.

[johnny d]

The men's version of the rule:


Art. 4. In an outnumbering fast-break situation, any defensive player(s) initially
shall be a secondary defender.

[Rob1968]

From the camera's angle, at full speed, the contact appears to be on the torso, of the defender. At slow motion, the contact appears to be on the lower portion of the defender's body, and the head and shoulders of the ballhandler appear to be past the front of the defender's torso.
The angle from the calling official's position could easily coincide with that statement, and the block call could be justified.
There also seems to be an apreciable amount of embellishment of the result of the contact, by the defender, i.e. an attempted "flop".

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Rob1968

and the head and shoulders of the ballhandler appear to be past the front of the defender's torso.

so what?

Just because there's "greater responsibility" on the defense doesn't mean it can't (or shouldn't) be a charge. The defense still didn't move.

[JRutledge]

No way that is anything but a CHARGE!!!!The defender did everything to gain LGP and stopped after getting LGP.

Peace

[Rooster]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

No way that is anything but a block. The defender did everything to gain LGP and stopped after getting LGP.

Peace

You mean charge, right?

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

No way that is anything but a block. The defender did everything to gain LGP and stopped after getting LGP.

Peace

Um .... say what?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Rob1968

From the camera's angle, at full speed, the contact appears to be on the torso, of the defender. At slow motion, the contact appears to be on the lower portion of the defender's body, and the head and shoulders of the ballhandler appear to be past the front of the defender's torso.
The angle from the calling official's position could easily coincide with that statement, and the block call could be justified.
There also seems to be an apreciable amount of embellishment of the result of the contact, by the defender, i.e. an attempted "flop".

Head and shoulders is a rule of thumb, it's not a hard/fast rule to define a block. It works well when both players are moving, but even then isn't definitive.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

No way that is anything but a block. The defender did everything to gain LGP and stopped after getting LGP.

Peace

Originally Posted by Rooster

You mean charge, right?

I'm sure that is what he meant since the rest of his post is consistent with him ruling it a charge......and I agree with that.

[HawkeyeCubP]

1. No.
2. Some do. I hear that crap at least twice a season at the HS level in meetings or in post-game discussions about plays.
3. This should not be a double whistle. Drive starts from the C's PCA. Defender is in the C's PCA. The contact is in the C's PCA. (--And well outside the RA, which is irrelevant regarding who should have the primary whistle on it, anyway.) The L having a quick (read - at the same time as the C, creating a true double whistle, instead of a cadence whistle) is inappropriate here. C's call, all the way. (L only gets if C doesn't make the call for some reason - and then, with a cadence or almost-late whistle.) - I'm speaking in NCAA-W mechanics terms and philosophy here, but I would easily argue that what I've just typed completely applies to NFHS, too, for this play.

[JetMetFan]

Hawk....thanks on #3. For all you NCAAM officials out there this is the C's call all the way on the NCAAW's side. Most supervisors I've spoken with at camps wouldn't want a double whistle here.

[johnny d]

Originally Posted by JetMetFan

Most supervisors I've spoken with at camps wouldn't want a double whistle here.

I understand that in some situations there are vastly different philosophies between the NCAA-M and NCAA-W but I don't see how a double whistle on a transition play in the paint is a problem. Sure a cadence whistle would probably be better, but I just don't understand the mentality to avoid double whistles.

[Rich1]

Can't tell from the camera angle but maybe the defender kicked out a knee or hip as the shooter tried to step by. It does look to me like the shooter tried to avoid contact but I can't tell if she was successful. I don't think its close enough to go with a block if that's not what happened so I would have a PC foul if I didn't see the leg or hip bump from the defender.

Always interesting how where you see a play from can change what you think it should be called. Wish coaches and fans would remember that.