The Official Forum

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)
-   Basketball (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/)
-   -   SWAC Men's Championship Game--Video Request (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/97519-swac-mens-championship-game-video-request.html)

Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. Sat Mar 15, 2014 05:40pm

SWAC Men's Championship Game--Video Request
 
Texas Southern had the ball and there was a blocking foul called against Prairie View A&M with 3:25 left in the Second Half. I would appreciate someone posting the video. I would have called it a charge. Thank you in advance.

MTD, Sr.

JetMetFan Sun Mar 16, 2014 12:29pm

video added
 
Here's the play...


<iframe width="853" height="480" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/A-BIDWfdbB8?rel=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

BillyMac Sun Mar 16, 2014 12:37pm

Confused In Connecticut ...
 
Since one official signaled block, and the other signaled charge, then I'm going with a double foul. Wait? I'm being told ... What? Another thread? Discussion? Never mind.

BryanV21 Sun Mar 16, 2014 01:14pm

I think I have an offensive foul.

The defender has LGP, and then looks like he slides sideways and to the side... not towards the dribbler. And the kicker to me is seeing the dribbler extend an elbow.

just another ref Sun Mar 16, 2014 01:21pm

Pc

BillyMac Sun Mar 16, 2014 01:40pm

Player Control Foul ...
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by BryanV21 (Post 927249)
...he slides sideways ... not toward the dribbler ... the dribbler extend an elbow.

Agree. It's not needed, but the elbow is the icing on the cake.

Lcubed48 Sun Mar 16, 2014 02:54pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by BryanV21 (Post 927249)
I think I have an offensive foul.

The defender has LGP, and then looks like he slides sideways and to the side... not towards the dribbler. And the kicker to me is seeing the dribbler extend an elbow.

What he said. PC.

Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. Sun Mar 16, 2014 03:32pm

I had a PC too.

MTD, Sr.

Raymond Sun Mar 16, 2014 04:08pm

Initial contact should have been a foul per the emphasis on rule 10-1-4, but at the point the whistle was blown, that should have been a PC.

JugglingReferee Sun Mar 16, 2014 06:20pm

I think the NCAA has officials steering away from calling PCs. This is textbook PC.

Camron Rust Sun Mar 16, 2014 06:48pm

Pc

Sharpshooternes Mon Mar 17, 2014 10:03am

Quote:

Originally Posted by JugglingReferee (Post 927301)
I think the NCAA has officials steering away from calling PCs. This is textbook PC.

Totally agree with this. It seems that they are always defaulting to a blocking foul for every block/charge play when they really should be doing it on shooting block charges(upward motion) and not on drive plays such as this. These non shooting non upward plays should be called the same before. That is great defense being penalized.

AremRed Mon Mar 17, 2014 01:14pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef (Post 927279)
Initial contact should have been a foul per the emphasis on rule 10-1-4, but at the point the whistle was blown, that should have been a PC.

Really? I don't see the defender gaining any advantage from that momentary touching with the hands. In fact I see the contact uncalled in every D1 game I watch. I know it's a POE, but something that brief? Not a foul. Ant versus elephant.

Camron Rust Mon Mar 17, 2014 01:49pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by AremRed (Post 927407)
Really? I don't see the defender gaining any advantage from that momentary touching with the hands. In fact I see the contact uncalled in every D1 game I watch. I know it's a POE, but something that brief? Not a foul. Ant versus elephant.

And even if they were, it wouldn't be a block as was signaled.

johnny d Mon Mar 17, 2014 01:55pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by AremRed (Post 927407)
Really? I don't see the defender gaining any advantage from that momentary touching with the hands. In fact I see the contact uncalled in every D1 game I watch. I know it's a POE, but something that brief? Not a foul. Ant versus elephant.

I disagree. The contact beforehand by the defender was an arm bar, not a touching with the hands. This action, even when brief has been called much more consistently as a foul than the brief touching with hands has been. The arm bar call does not require a judgment as to whether or not the defender gained an advantage, it falls under one of Adam's automatics. Also, touching with a hand is legal. It does not become illegal until it is done repeatedly, continuously, or with both hands.

JetMetFan Mon Mar 17, 2014 01:57pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef (Post 927279)
Initial contact should have been a foul per the emphasis on rule 10-1-4, but at the point the whistle was blown, that should have been a PC.

Quote:

Originally Posted by AremRed (Post 927407)
Really? I don't see the defender gaining any advantage from that momentary touching with the hands. In fact I see the contact uncalled in every D1 game I watch. I know it's a POE, but something that brief? Not a foul. Ant versus elephant.

I don't either. As someone on the Women's side who's had it beaten into his head to blow a whistle on these the only call under 10-1-4 would be the arm bar. For an "automatic" foul due to an arm bar it has to be extended away from the defender's body. B1 doesn't get much of a chance to do that before he's hit by A1's arm (then shoulder, etc.).

APG Mon Mar 17, 2014 02:00pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by AremRed (Post 927407)
Really? I don't see the defender gaining any advantage from that momentary touching with the hands. In fact I see the contact uncalled in every D1 game I watch. I know it's a POE, but something that brief? Not a foul. Ant versus elephant.

Without regard to the play at hand, 10-1-4 is written and enforced in a manner such that you don't judge advantage gained or not. It is a foul simply because.

johnny d Mon Mar 17, 2014 02:02pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by JetMetFan (Post 927422)
I don't either. As someone on the Women's side who's had it beaten into his head to blow a whistle on these the only call under 10-1-4 would be the arm bar. For an "automatic" foul due to an arm bar it has to be extended away from the defender's body. B1 doesn't get much of a chance to do that before he's hit by A1's arm (then shoulder, etc.).


In every video bulletin sent out by Adam's this year, there are plays where he either congratulates the officials for calling the arm bar without extension away from the defenders body, or admonishes the officials that don't make that call when it occurs. Yet another difference in how things are expected to be handled on the NCAA-M vs. NCAA-W side.

JetMetFan Mon Mar 17, 2014 02:27pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by johnny d (Post 927426)
In every video bulletin sent out by Adam's this year, there are plays where he either congratulates the officials for calling the arm bar without extension away from the defenders body, or admonishes the officials that don't make that call when it occurs. Yet another difference in how things are expected to be handled on the NCAA-M vs. NCAA-W side.

Why am I not surprised? :rolleyes: The NCAAW bulletins - and we haven't had many - have reminded us the auto-foul for the arm bar is for contact away from the body. If the arm bar is next to/close to the body there's no foul unless there's continuous contact.

In real-time I was more inclined to put this under the defender raising his hands within his vertical plane and/or defending himself because contact was coming...mainly because he was in "retreat" mode (i.e., moving backwards) as opposed to moving forwards in "attack" mode.

bob jenkins Mon Mar 17, 2014 03:03pm

NCAAW: Ball Handler or Dribbler
a. Definition. A ball handler or dribbler is any player with player control
(holding or dribbling) outside the lane area, either facing or with her back to
the basket. An arm-bar is contact with the forearm that is away from the body.

NCAAM: Section 5. Hand-Checking (Impeding the Progress of a Player)
To curtail hand-checking, officials must address it at the beginning of the game,
and related personal fouls must be called consistently throughout the game. Some
guidelines for officials to use when officiating hand-checking:
a. When a defensive player keeps a hand or forearm on an opponent, it is a
personal foul.
b. When a defensive player puts two hands on an opponent, it is a personal foul.
c. When a defensive player continually jabs by extending his arm(s) and placing
a hand or forearm on the opponent, it is a personal foul.
d. When a defensive player uses an arm bar to impede the progress of a dribbler,
it is a personal foul.


(The term is not defined, that I can see).

(Emphasis added)

walt Tue Mar 18, 2014 11:37am

From the video angle and the position of the official, one of the first things he sees is the defender's forearm coming in. If I had to guess, that is why he immediately went to a block call. Why he didn't call the arm bar, I have no idea but I think that is why he called a defensive foul. To me, this is PC whether in NCAA-W or NFHS. The forearm wasn't extended away from the body IMHO.

Camron Rust Tue Mar 18, 2014 02:17pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by walt (Post 927563)
From the video angle and the position of the official, one of the first things he sees is the defender's forearm coming in. If I had to guess, that is why he immediately went to a block call. Why he didn't call the arm bar, I have no idea but I think that is why he called a defensive foul. To me, this is PC whether in NCAA-W or NFHS. The forearm wasn't extended away from the body IMHO.

A forearm wouldn't be signaled as a block. It would be a push or illegal use of hands.

Multiple Sports Tue Mar 18, 2014 02:24pm

BNR - Right Again !!!!!!
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef (Post 927279)
Initial contact should have been a foul per the emphasis on rule 10-1-4, but at the point the whistle was blown, that should have been a PC.


Having the pleasure of working with BNR before, he is absolutley correct. There are two hands from the defender on the dribbler. That is a fouls on the defense, regardless of the adv / disadv theory .....

walt Tue Mar 18, 2014 02:24pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Camron Rust (Post 927602)
A forearm wouldn't be signaled as a block. It would be a push or illegal use of hands.

Agree Camron. If the forearm is why he called the foul, only he can explain why he gave the block signal. As I have been told at camp, signal what happened.

JetMetFan Tue Mar 18, 2014 04:28pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Multiple Sports (Post 927607)
There are two hands from the defender on the dribbler.

Two hands on the dribbler? I'm not seeing that either. The defender's right arm never was involved in the play.

Also, since Bob posted the NCAAM rule book wording regarding the arm bar would this be considered use of an arm bar "to impede the progress of a dribbler?" The only "progress" the dribbler appeared to be making was towards the defender's chest.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:47am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1