VCU-UMASS - Block/Charge (Video x2)

[JetMetFan]

On #1 I have a PC. B1 attained LGP as A1 was crossing the division line and I didn't see anything to indicate he lost LGP after that. The forearm didn't help A1's cause.

On #2...that falls into the category of a "lose a game check" offense. As I mentioned in another thread, supervisors can deal with it if we kick calls but messing up a rule is another story.

[rockyroad]

On play 2, did the other officials try to talk calling official out of shooting the free throws? Or did all 3 of them screw his up? Didn't see the game, and the clip doesn't show much...I just don't get how all three just forgot something that basic.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

On play 2, did the other officials try to talk calling official out of shooting the free throws? Or did all 3 of them screw his up? Didn't see the game, and the clip doesn't show much...I just don't get how all three just forgot something that basic.

I was waiting for them to come together, but they never did.

[JetMetFan]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

On play 2, did the other officials try to talk calling official out of shooting the free throws? Or did all 3 of them screw his up? Didn't see the game, and the clip doesn't show much...I just don't get how all three just forgot something that basic.

If they got together it would've taken place off camera in the period before the first FT.

I'm also surprised - a little, not much - that UMass's bench didn't realize the situation. Not that all HCs know the rules but it's generally part of the job description on the NCAA level.

[justacoach]

Originally Posted by JetMetFan

On #1 I have a PC. B1 attained LGP as A1 was crossing the division line and I didn't see anything to indicate he lost LGP after that. The forearm didn't help A1's cause.

On #2...that falls into the category of a "lose a game check" offense. As I mentioned in another thread, supervisors can deal with it if we kick calls but messing up a rule is another story.

110% concur on both accounts.

1-Scratched my head for a long time about the 'Defender tried to get in A1's path but was not able to do so with 2 feet down to get LGP before contact.' part of Camron's post. Never thought the rules had a requirement for establishing, much less maintaining LGP coincident with the illegal contact.
I always train new officials that there is a video and not a snapshot that needs to be evaluated for block vs charge plays.

2-How in heII can 4 D-1 officials botch such an obvious call?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by justacoach

110% concur on both accounts.

1-Scratched my head for a long time about the 'Defender tried to get in A1's path but was not able to do so with 2 feet down to get LGP before contact.' part of Camron's post. Never thought the rules had a requirement for establishing, much less maintaining LGP coincident with the illegal contact.
I always train new officials that there is a video and not a snapshot that needs to be evaluated for block vs charge plays.

2-How in heII can 4 D-1 officials botch such an obvious call?

Some seem to define "path" far more narrowly than others.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by justacoach

110% concur on both accounts.

1-Scratched my head for a long time about the 'Defender tried to get in A1's path but was not able to do so with 2 feet down to get LGP before contact.' part of Camron's post. Never thought the rules had a requirement for establishing, much less maintaining LGP coincident with the illegal contact.
I always train new officials that there is a video and not a snapshot that needs to be evaluated for block vs charge plays.

Whatever forearm there was (and it was not one that I'd even call on its own) was after the block was done so it doesn't matter.

The defender had LGP when the offense was near half court but lost it IMO when A1 diverted to the side and B1 rotated to be able to move more quickly to get back into A1's path (seen about 24 and 28 seconds into the video). He tried to get back in front of A1, He does, but never gets the 2nd foot back down before contact to reestablish LGP.

[deecee]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Whatever forearm there was (and it was not one that I'd even call on its own) was after the block was done so it doesn't matter.

The defender had LGP when the offense was near half court but lost it IMO when A1 diverted to the side and B1 rotated to be able to move more quickly to get back into A1's path (seen about 24 and 28 seconds into the video). He tried to get back in front of A1, He does, but never gets the 2nd foot back down before contact to reestablish LGP.

I don't agree. He never lost LGP and the defender is allowed to move is he not? the offensive player never beat him or caused him to lose LGP either. Contact is on the offensive player. CHARRRRRGGGEEE!!!!

But for NCAA-M this year. The block is totally acceptable.

[johnny d]

Originally Posted by deecee

But for NCAA-M this year. The block is totally acceptable.

I don't like beating dead horses, but the rule change on the NCAA-M side has nothing to do with this play.

Originally Posted by johnny d

I don't like beating dead horses, but the rule change on the NCAA-M side has nothing to do with this play.

He's joking :P

[Sharpshooternes]

Originally Posted by johnny d

I don't like beating dead horses, but the rule change on the NCAA-M side has nothing to do with this play.

I think he started his upward motion.

Yes the rules change has a lot to do with this play as now pretty much everything is now defaulted to a block.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Sharpshooternes

I think he started his upward motion.

Yes the rules change has a lot to do with this play as now pretty much everything is now defaulted to a block.

Sure, he started it before contact, but I don't think he started it before the defender was in position.

[APG]

Originally Posted by Sharpshooternes

I think he started his upward motion.

Yes the rules change has a lot to do with this play as now pretty much everything is now defaulted to a block.

This play has nothing to do with any upward motion as the player never even ended his dribble.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by deecee

I don't agree. He never lost LGP and the defender is allowed to move is he not? the offensive player never beat him or caused him to lose LGP either. Contact is on the offensive player. CHARRRRRGGGEEE!!!!

Yes, the defender can move, but he has to stay in the path 100% of the time, I don't feel he did.

[stick]

[QUOTE=JetMetFan;924146]On #1 I have a PC. B1 attained LGP as A1 was crossing the division line and I didn't see anything to indicate he lost LGP after that. The forearm didn't help A1's cause.

Agreed. It appears it was good defense by the UMass defender. Your correct about the off-arm also. One of those judgement calls. jmho