Kansas v Texas: Close Block/Charge Play

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Jay R

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.

I was just kidding, actually.

There are situations like this where there is a legitimate travel as the player recognizes the imminent contact, but this isn't one of them.

[Jay R]

Originally Posted by Rich

I was just kidding, actually.

There are situations like this where there is a legitimate travel as the player recognizes the imminent contact, but this isn't one of them.

I knew YOU were kidding.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by 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.

Perhaps it would be better than sticking the wrong player with the foul.

[HokiePaul]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

Calling a PC foul on the guy catching the ball is not fair at all. He had no chance to avoid the contact. That is, unless you say he shouldn't be allowed to catch that ball in the first place.

We should enforce the rules, not twist them to what we see as fair. That said, if you are looking for fair, I don't understand how punishing the defense for anticipating the play and getting to a spot legally is fair either. Think about this ... If a teamate throws the ball out of bounds, then he would not be allowed to legally catch it. You don't ignore the out of bounds rule because it seems fair to let the player have a chance to catch the ball. Likewise, if a teamate throws him the ball in a way that leads him into a collision with a defender, that doesn't mean you ignore the rule on charging because it seems fair to let the player catch the ball.

[JetMetFan]

By the way, here's the case play from the NCAA (it's AR 85 in both rule books):

B1 takes a spot on the playing court before A1 jumps to catch a pass.
1. A1 returns to the playing court and lands on B1; or
2. B1 moves to a new spot while A1 is airborne. A1 comes to the floor on one foot and then charges into B1.
RULING: In both (1) and (2), the foul shall be on A1. In (1), B1 is entitled to that spot on the floor provided (s)he gets there legally before the offensive player becomes airborne. However, in (2), when A1 possesses the ball then lands on the floor, no time and distance is required.
(Rule 4-17.4.c and .d, 4-17.3 and Exception 4-17.7)

[dahoopref]

John Adams has ruled this play a "block" on today's Arbiter video bulletin #14; correct call.

Originally Posted by dahoopref

John Adams has ruled this play a "block" on today's Arbiter video bulletin #14; correct call.

Did he explain his reasoning?

[dahoopref]

Originally Posted by AremRed

Did he explain his reasoning?

Rule 4 Sec 17 Art 5 a thru d

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by dahoopref

John Adams has ruled this play a "block" on today's Arbiter video bulletin #14; correct call.

Wow. Well wouldn't be the first time I've disagreed with an officiating coordinator on a play.

Per the rulebook there's no way I can see that this is anything but a PC.

Originally Posted by dahoopref

Rule 4 Sec 17 Art 5 a thru d

So basically John ruled that the Texas player did not have the ball. Thus, time/distance is a factor.

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by AremRed

So basically John ruled that the Texas player did not have the ball. Thus, time/distance is a factor.

If that's the case, I'd like to know what it means to take a step and a half while firmly holding the ball?

[JetMetFan]

Originally Posted by Welpe

If that's the case, I'd like to know what it means to take a step and a half while firmly holding the ball?

So...should NCAAM expect a new interpretation as to what constitutes possession?

If I was Bill Self I'd send Adams a screen shot of the Texas player holding the ball with both hands while he was still at least one giant step away from my defender.

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by JetMetFan

So...should NCAAM expect a new interpretation as to what constitutes possession?

Maybe it'll look like the catch rule for NCAA football.

I know one thing, with what's been going on with the rules lately, I'd be smiling if I were an NCAA-W official.

[JetMetFan]

Originally Posted by Welpe

I know one thing, with what's been going on with the rules lately, I'd be smiling if I were an NCAA-W official.

You mean like me?

And here I was thinking the LDB and the RA would be a headache. Those are a piece of cake compared to this.

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by JetMetFan

You mean like me?

Eggsactly!