Verticality/2 Plays (video)

[JetMetFan]

I was trying to figure out whether the L on both these plays was ball-watching and I think that might have been the case.

Regardless, it was consistent...at least as far as the defender was concerned since the same kid got dinged twice.

Note...this is a High School game.

[walt]

Assuming no RA in effect, I have nothing on either play. The defenders arms are "naturally" vertical (as absolute straight over shoulders is un-natural). At three different camps last year, in the classroom work, and in some videos sent by supervisors this year, that kid IS within his vertical plan, IMHO. Both plays (to me) are no calls.

[JugglingReferee]

Me too. I see verticality here.

[Rob1968]

Originally Posted by walt

Assuming no RA in effect, I have nothing on either play. The defenders arms are "naturally" vertical (as absolute straight over shoulders is un-natural). At three different camps last year, in the classroom work, and in some videos sent by supervisors this year, that kid IS within his vertical plan, IMHO. Both plays (to me) are no calls.

Utah HS 5A (largest classification) state semi-final. I see this play, which I agree, should be a no-call, called against the defender far too often.

[JRutledge]

Neither is a foul IMO. The RA would have nothing to do with it if these were not foul from my understanding.

Peace

[JetMetFan]

Jeff is right. Even if there was an RA involved it wouldn't be in effect because the defender wasn't trying to draw a PC. He was trying to block the shot which is allowed.

One other thought: the importance of communicating as a crew at halftime. Play #1 happened in the first half, play #2 in the second. Obviously I don't know if play #1 was discussed at halftime but if it was I think play #2 is handled differently.

[Camron Rust]

In the first play, it appears the defender was jumping across the path of the shooter given where he jumped from and where he landed. It could be that the lead didn't judge he had LGP (edit) because he was moving sideways after the shooter was airborne.

The 2nd play even looks a little bit like that, but to a lessor degree.

I do think he actually got LGP because he got in the path before the shooter went up, even if he still had sideways movement, but it wasn't by much.

[twocentsworth]

These plays AREN'T fouls.

An official who is deemed worthy of this assignment should be talented enough to know that these are not fouls.

[Toren]

Pretty easy no calls in my opinion. Patient whistles and processing the amount of contact would help get these correct.

[pfan1981]

Rule 4-45 is where you can find verticality. The defender is entitled to his space from the floor to the ceiling. This is always a good rule to quote with a coach.

Here is my question.......

Let's say there is a fast break. Let's say a defender is set up to take a charge for a long while. The guy is going to steam roll him. Instead of staying on the ground he jumps straight up. He still gets plowed into. Can this be a charge or just a no call?

I agree these officials should have known to no call this contact.

[Bad Zebra]

Unfortunate. These are textbook examples of POV. Excellent defense in both instances and the defender is dinged twice.

Also unfortunate that they took place in separate halves. This is exactly the type of play that should be discussed as a crew during the half. My question to my partner would be "Did you like that block you called on the big player on white?" "Let's try to reward good defense"..or something to that effect.

[JetMetFan]

Originally Posted by pfan1981

Rule 4-45 is where you can find verticality. The defender is entitled to his space from the floor to the ceiling. This is always a good rule to quote with a coach.

Here is my question.......

Let's say there is a fast break. Let's say a defender is set up to take a charge for a long while. The guy is going to steam roll him. Instead of staying on the ground he jumps straight up. He still gets plowed into. Can this be a charge or just a no call?

I agree these officials should have known to no call this contact.

Yes, it can be. I've seen it on instruction/interpretation videos and I've also called it...much to the chagrin of the offensive team's HC. Players don't have to be on the ground to be displaced illegally.