Two plays, two great calls, one official (video)
 

Time to focus on us when we do good. Two plays in the final 15 secs of Friday's UVA/GTech ACCW Tournament game. The first was an RA Block. The second was a T for taunting after a blocked shot.


<iframe width="853" height="480" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/FCSqipGKHUM?rel=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Good calls, but does the L normally signal a 3 pt attempt in WNCAA?

Yes, the L's primary extends into the corner in NCAA-W mechanics.

Signals the attempt, but not the make.

That was a horrible call. It was a PC.

Taunting hmmmmm

First call was a block with or without the RA but using the RA as the reason pretty much eliminates any question about the judgement.

That is a clear and absolute blocking foul. Play doesn't originate in the lower defensive box, thus the RA is in play. Defender's right heel is in the RA.

And even if it wasn't, Camron has this right...it's still a block w/o the RA in play...defender is still sliding laterally into the spot after the defender is airborne.

Calling Bugs Bunny....

You have got to be kidding. The end line replay clearly shows the defender sliding laterally in on the airborne shooter.

I worked with her at camp last year. She is a great official, and is awesome to work with!

I'm impressed. Who is she?

I saw this game live on tv and was instantly impressed. She has got whatever "it" is.

Due to the thread title, I expected to see two difficult decisions in the video.
However, the first one is really nothing more than an out of bounds call--just a matter of looking for where the player's foot is--and the second is a routine unsporting T.

I would expect most competent HS officials to be able to get these plays correct, although there is some adapting that must be done to work with the RA.

Hmmmmmmm?

So what would you call screaming in the face of an opponent after blocking their shot? Many wouldn't have been willing to call it given the time/score.

Lauren Holtkamp.

I thought this was an issue of the RA, not anything else. I do not claim to know much about Women's rules in this area. And that is why the officials pointed to the floor.

Peace

Block, RA, perfect NCAA-W mechanic at spot. The T for taunting was easy as well. She is good. I worked with her at a camp as well.

The Lower Defensive Box is the only difference between the women's and men's rules in this area.

Easy T to identify. Great call on the RA play as well.

And none of what you just said helps me understand why these calls should be different.

I do realize that theres are rules differences, but how does that relate to the RA or secondary defender? And I am honestly asking too. ;)

Peace

Gotcha

I don't think in this case they would be different. Even if you factor in the LDB (for me) and upward motion (for you) the fact the defender didn't appear to have LGP makes it all the same. For once :-D

Here's to hoping I gave a good answer ;-)

Perfect NBA mechanic too!

I believe she is in the D-league, and maybe even the non-staff NBA roster.

Yes, both. That's why I said that!

block

I really dislike the charge call in situations like this. Not a fan of coaches teaching their players to take charges when they aren't called for. Just play D and defend the ball. In my opinion too many charges are called when an offensive player makes a good move to get into the lane and a defensive player steps in at the last second. Try to block the shot or get out the way.
Darn you to heck Shane Battier!:rolleyes:

While I also have a block, I very much disagree with the mentality that defense should block the shot or let them through. Good defense rarely requires blocking a shot, it just doesn't let them get to the shot to start with. The job of the defense is to stop them from getting to the basket...and that includes help defenders cutting off the path in enough time that the offense could stop. And, the offense usually sees them coming, has plenty of time to stop, but presses on with the hope they'll get to the spot first or they'll get a referee that thinks everything should be a block.

Actually, it's not quite as simple as just looking where the foot is in NCAAW. The official also needs to know where the player started her move to the basket, whether it was inside or outside the LDB. Not necessarily easy if that play originates outside one's PCA. Excellent call.

I'm with Camron. Unfortunately for us, it appears the NCAA and NBA agree with you or there wouldn't be such things as RAs.

Then again, I'm sure your view doesn't affect how you call a HS game since there's no such thing as an RA in HS games.

Trying to bee a maroon (a la Bugs Bunny)??? Watch her right foot.

Agreed. Most players have no business trying to block a shot anyway.

Do you officiate games in which the RA and the LDB are used??

Agree. This was my first thought.

I agree. Back when I was coaching I remember saying "get trying to block shots and actually play defense." Actually I remember saying it a lot every day.

As goofy as it sounds in FIBA by rule that RA play would be a no-call.

In the NCAA-W game, is it the case that if you have a block, because the defense didn't establish LGP in time, you do NOT point to the RA?

In other words, if it's a block, it's a block. If it would have been a PC, but the player was in the RA, then you point to the RA?

I'm wondering cause in this case, she points to the RA, but as many have said this was a block regardless. So although I like how strong and commanding the call is, the point may not have been needed.

If the foul occurred in the RA and the move to the basket started outside the LDB as this one did, you indicate such just as the official in the video did. Block signal followed by a point at the RA. The block outside the RA would just be a block signal.

It is a communication tool, telling the Coach (and everyone else) that LGP, being "set", or any of that other stuff really doesn't matter because it is an RA play.

Agree. Going with RA over a block takes most of the judgement out of the decision. They're in the RA or not and there isn't much that can be disputed about it.

I'm in love.....:o

And you're older than you look...Calm down! :D

In NCAA-M, if it's in the RA but it would have been a block outside the RA, then we don't point.

Just FYI.

So I was curious about the call in NCAA-W.

Thanks.

The way an NCAA-W official explained it to me:

If it's a blocking foul regardless of being in the RA or not, there's no pointing to the RA

If it's a blocking foul solely because the defender is in the RA (as in the defender, absent of the RA, would have obtained LGP), you point to the RA. This tells everyone the play is a RA blocking foul and also gives your partners an opportunity to give any additional information if needed (as in hey the player originated in the LDB so the RA shouldn't come into play...or the defender was outside the RA).

So on this play, I don't think the the point was technically necessary as the defender was late anyway.

FYI, the mechanics above are the NBA mechanics for RA plays.

So now I wonder if she would have ruled PC if it had been outside the RA?:confused:

Your first two paragraphs are supposed to be the proper mechanic. Maybe the lead had a charge, except for the arc. When I slow it down, I don't think it's an obvious block without the RA.

She didn't have to point if she was going to rule it a block regardless but as was mentioned before she might have done it just to remove any dispute. It's not wrong in any way since the defender had a foot in the RA, just extra.

As JetMet and Camron have alluded to, wouldn't it be an easier sell to point to the RA even if it was a block anyway?

Yes and no. Took this year off from college games, so worked with the RA for a few years, but never the LDB.

If you have a block, regardless of the RA, you do not point. What if your partner comes in and says that the defender actually wasn't in the RA?

In this case, sure it doesn't hurt...

But as BNR alluded to, what happens if you're saying you have an RA block and your partner tells you the defender wasn't in the RA? Or your partner comes in and tells you the play started in the LDB?

Glad I work on the men's side where all we have to worry about is blarges ;)

See what I did there?:rolleyes:

:)

Presumably I would only point to the RA if I was a 100% the defender was there.....which I would do anyway if it were a typical RA play.

The NCAA has posted plenty of videos where officials have incorrectly pointed to the RA.

Which probably result in wrong calls which happen anyway. I don't see why if you see the defenders feet in the RA, even if it's gonna be a block anyway, pointing to the RA is a bad thing.

The problem is that pointing to the RA indicates the play would have been a PC/charge if it happened outside the RA. Pointing to the RA gives your partners the opportunity to provide information regarding the location of the defender, that they would not provide if you just call a block. If you are then presented with evidence that the defender was indeed outside the RA, you are going to have a hard time justifying not changing the call to PC/charge and explaining to the coach that it would have been a block anywhere on the court, you were just too lazy to use the correct mechanic.

Ok, I understand now. Not pointing to the RA leaves open the option of your partner(s) coming with info.

If you don't point to the RA, partners have no information to bring; you are calling a block b/c of illegal contact by the defender.

If you point to the RA, you are saying that normally it would be a PC, but b/c the defender was in the RA it is, by rule, a block.

The most likely time a partner will bring information is if you call a PC and the defender was in the RA.