Kansas v Texas: Close Block/Charge Play

[just another ref]

I have a charge. Not that close, really, just happened quickly. Tie goes to the offense, even when it's not a tie.

[Camron Rust]

Defender was there. Offense had the ball. No time/distance required. Charnge.

[bob jenkins]

Maybe the official thought the white player had gathered the ball for a try?

[JugglingReferee]

PC. Time & distance is not required since A3 had the ball.

[BryanV21]

Rule 4-23
ART. 5... Guarding a moving opponent without the ball:
a. Time and distance are factors required to obtain initial legal position.
b. The guard must give the opponent the time and/or distance to avoid contact.
c. The distance need not be more than two strides.

I wouldn't treat the player receiving the ball as "an opponent with the ball", as in Article 4... where time and distance are not factors. By the time he caught and gathered the ball he had no chance to do anything with it (dribble, shoot, pass, or just stop with it), as the defender was less than two steps away.

Perhaps if the defender was within the offensive player's line of sight, then you can say the offensive player had enough of a chance to avoid contact. But since the offensive player was looking back and up at the pass, I would say without reservation that the defender was at fault for the contact.

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

Rule 4-23
ART. 5... Guarding a moving opponent without the ball:
a. Time and distance are factors required to obtain initial legal position.
b. The guard must give the opponent the time and/or distance to avoid contact.
c. The distance need not be more than two strides.

I wouldn't treat the player receiving the ball as "an opponent with the ball", as in Article 4... where time and distance are not factors. By the time he caught and gathered the ball he had no chance to do anything with it (dribble, shoot, pass, or just stop with it), as the defender was less than two steps away.

Perhaps if the defender was within the offensive player's line of sight, then you can say the offensive player had enough of a chance to avoid contact. But since the offensive player was looking back and up at the pass, I would say without reservation that the defender was at fault for the contact.

Had the offensive player caught the pass before the contact took place?

He obviously had, so then he had the ball and time and distance are not factors.

[BryanV21]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

Had the offensive player caught the pass before the contact took place?

He obviously had, so then he had the ball and time and distance are not factors.

Rule 4-12
ART 1... A player is in control of the ball when he/she is holding or dribbling a live ball.

The player is clearly not dribbling the ball at the time of contact, so would you say he is holding it? I wouldn't. Because when I read the dribbling part of the equation, "holding" tells me the player is standing still with the ball... which the player clearly isn't standing still with the ball.

[deecee]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

Rule 4-23
ART. 5... Guarding a moving opponent without the ball:
a. Time and distance are factors required to obtain initial legal position.
b. The guard must give the opponent the time and/or distance to avoid contact.
c. The distance need not be more than two strides.

I wouldn't treat the player receiving the ball as "an opponent with the ball", as in Article 4... where time and distance are not factors. By the time he caught and gathered the ball he had no chance to do anything with it (dribble, shoot, pass, or just stop with it), as the defender was less than two steps away.

Perhaps if the defender was within the offensive player's line of sight, then you can say the offensive player had enough of a chance to avoid contact. But since the offensive player was looking back and up at the pass, I would say without reservation that the defender was at fault for the contact.

So you are saying that you would categorize the player with the ball as an "opponent without the ball". Interesting as with or without the ball is a pretty black or white thing. He either has it or he doesn't. In this case he has it. What does line of sight have to do with anything, I don't think the rule book mentions that exception.

[johnny d]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

I wouldn't treat the player receiving the ball as "an opponent with the ball", as in Article 4... where time and distance are not factors. By the time he caught and gathered the ball he had no chance to do anything with it (dribble, shoot, pass, or just stop with it), as the defender was less than two steps away.

Perhaps if the defender was within the offensive player's line of sight, then you can say the offensive player had enough of a chance to avoid contact. But since the offensive player was looking back and up at the pass, I would say without reservation that the defender was at fault for the contact.

I have a feeling you have a hard time getting many of these block/charge plays correct in your games. The last two plays you have debated the calls based on rules interpretations that are clearly wrong. The Texas player has the ball, time and distance are irrelevant, it is that simple. I think you are interpreting rules through the prism of your biased belief that the rules favor the defensive player.

[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

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

I wouldn't treat the player receiving the ball as "an opponent with the ball", as in Article 4...

It's this simple... You SHOULD.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

I wouldn't treat the player receiving the ball as "an opponent with the ball", as in Article 4... where time and distance are not factors. By the time he caught and gathered the ball he had no chance to do anything with it (dribble, shoot, pass, or just stop with it), as the defender was less than two steps away.

See 10.6.11D (b) -- it's almost this exact play.

The player had the ball -- it's a charge.

[BryanV21]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

See 10.6.11 (b) -- it's almost this exact play.

The player had the ball -- it's a charge.

Is that case from the 2013-14 case book? Because 10.6.11 (b) in that case book seems to support my side.

In part a of the situation, the screener (A1) is called for a blocking foul, apparently because A1 is so close that B1 cannot avoid A1 and contact results.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

Rule 4-23
ART. 5... Guarding a moving opponent without the ball:
a. Time and distance are factors required to obtain initial legal position.
b. The guard must give the opponent the time and/or distance to avoid contact.
c. The distance need not be more than two strides.

I wouldn't treat the player receiving the ball as "an opponent with the ball", as in Article 4... where time and distance are not factors. By the time he caught and gathered the ball he had no chance to do anything with it (dribble, shoot, pass, or just stop with it), as the defender was less than two steps away.

Perhaps if the defender was within the offensive player's line of sight, then you can say the offensive player had enough of a chance to avoid contact. But since the offensive player was looking back and up at the pass, I would say without reservation that the defender was at fault for the contact.

You are wrong. Please see other posts as for the reasons why.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

Rule 4-23
ART. 5... Guarding a moving opponent without the ball:
a. Time and distance are factors required to obtain initial legal position.
b. The guard must give the opponent the time and/or distance to avoid contact.
c. The distance need not be more than two strides.

I wouldn't treat the player receiving the ball as "an opponent with the ball", as in Article 4... where time and distance are not factors. By the time he caught and gathered the ball he had no chance to do anything with it (dribble, shoot, pass, or just stop with it), as the defender was less than two steps away.

Perhaps if the defender was within the offensive player's line of sight, then you can say the offensive player had enough of a chance to avoid contact. But since the offensive player was looking back and up at the pass, I would say without reservation that the defender was at fault for the contact.

Bryan:

First full disclosure: My mother graduated from Kansas and I am a Kansas fan, but people in the Forum will tell you I am always unbiased when it comes to officiaing.

Once the Texas player had control of the ball, the Kansas defender had established a LGP. Time and distance does not matter in this play nor does it matter whether the Texas player did or not see the Kansas player. This is a classic Casebook Play for a charge.

MTD, Sr.