Kansas v Texas: Close Block/Charge Play

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

I see this the same as I do when it comes to a receiver going for a pass in football.

If a receiver, who is watching the incoming pass not the defense, runs into a defender before making the catch it is the defender who is penalized... not the receiver.

Not a good comparison. The defender in football has no incentive to get to a certain spot first and be stationary. On the contrary, he benefits from laying back and timing his arrival to coincide with that of the ball.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by APG

Except most of the time, the defender isn't there for 3-4 steps and only attempts to take the charge at the last second. IMO, it' just a cheap way to try and play defense much like trying to run over and take a charge under the basket. The latter is all but gone from almost all levels of play...I wouldn't be surprised to see the former get eliminated by more than the NBA in the future.

Blocking a player's desired path is the essence of defense. The offense is in control of where and when to throw the pass. Nothing makes them throw that pass. If they see a defender that can cut off their path, they should choose a different path....unless of course you would rather watch layup drills.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

My intention is to understand a rule entirely, not just accept what the right call is and move on to the next play.

No one is disputing that your goal is good. Only that your methods of achieving that goal could be improved (and then maybe you'd advance to your goal more quickly and with other benefits).

[BryanV21]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Not a good comparison. The defender in football has no incentive to get to a certain spot first and be stationary. On the contrary, he benefits from laying back and timing his arrival to coincide with that of the ball.

It's something that popped in my head while watching the play.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

My intention is to understand a rule entirely, not just accept what the right call is and move on to the next play. That could very well mean reading into things too much. However, if the end result is a better understanding of the rule, then so be it. Down the road it will make me a better official.

I'm sorry if that stubbornness rubs any of you the wrong way. It's not meant to offend, it's meant to get more out of you.

Or maybe I'm just thick. I don't know. I have a better understanding of the rule, and I'm better for it. I could have just said "okay, it's a charge". But doing so would have been wrong of me. Unless I don't care.

Again... I'm sorry if that's too much for any of you to handle. I'm here to be better. If I make some friends, then that's great. I'd love that. But the bottom line is to be better, and due to my stubbornness I am.

Fair enough, and if you truly are here to learn, more power to you. Personally, you didn't rub me wrong through stubbornness. It was the comments on this and the other thread that you personally felt the game was skewed in one direction more than you like, and that if you could find a way to interpret a rule differently that what we're told so that you can further your personal opinion of fairness - that you would do so.

I have NO PROBLEM at all with you disagreeing with the pack and trying to understand where the difference lies (and heck .. maybe convincing those who disagree with you that you might be right - it happens)... I have HUGE issue with trying to instill your personal ideas of fairness on the game in contradiction with what the rules and the Rules Interpretors say.

[BryanV21]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

Fair enough, and if you truly are here to learn, more power to you. Personally, you didn't rub me wrong through stubbornness. It was the comments on this and the other thread that you personally felt the game was skewed in one direction more than you like, and that if you could find a way to interpret a rule differently that what we're told so that you can further your personal opinion of fairness - that you would do so.

I have NO PROBLEM at all with you disagreeing with the pack and trying to understand where the difference lies (and heck .. maybe convincing those who disagree with you that you might be right - it happens)... I have HUGE issue with trying to instill your personal ideas of fairness on the game in contradiction with what the rules and the Rules Interpretors say.

I don't know why I said that, because you're right... that is messed up.

[A Pennsylvania Coach]

Agree with most that it is a charge. Any thoughts on that call belonging to the C instead of the L?

[SNIPERBBB]

I wonder why the L is there at all. NCAA-M mechanic?

[Rich]

Anyone tempted to call this a travel?

[JRutledge]

I did not see other comments, but I have a charge.

Defender was in LGP, got to that spot first and prepared for contact.

Once again we penalize defenders for doing nothing wrong or illegal too much.

Peace

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by SNIPERBBB

I wonder why the L is there at all. NCAA-M mechanic?

Not necessarily a mechanic, but he could be more up the court to help out. But this really is the C's call most of the time.

Peace

[Toren]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Not necessarily a mechanic, but he could be more up the court to help out. But this really is the C's call most of the time.

Peace

And the C had a whistle and close down. The L sells it hard, so the C just held up on his signal, which is being a great partner.

Incidentally I have a PC.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Toren

And the C had a whistle and close down. The L sells it hard, so the C just held up on his signal, which is being a great partner.

Incidentally I have a PC.

I knew why that was the actions of the C, but that should have been his call to see. He can see between the bodies. The L is kind of looking behind. And in that case, the defender would get every benefit of the doubt from me if I was the L. I think the L forgot he has a partner looking dead across before coming hard with a call.

Peace

[Welpe]

It would have been mildly entertaining to watch the C come out with a late PC to force a double foul. Wrong on many accounts but at least amusing.

[Jay R]

Originally Posted by Rich

Anyone tempted to call this a travel?

Back in the old days before video, it always seemed to be the cop out. Unfortunately, there are still 2 or 3 guys in my area who would not hesitate to call the travel here.