NIT: Arkansas vs. California Blarge (Video)
 

I heard there was a Blarge in the cal ark game lastnight anyone see it or have video??

According to the play-by-play there were no double fouls called in the game.

I'm not sure, but I think the original call was PC, but then was changed to a block. I think maybe another official pointed out the defender was in the RA.

No blarge...in fact, no signals from anyone but the lead:

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="//www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/P4Mbp5-qbsM" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Ok...by the new "upward motion" standard in NCAA-M, should this be a block? Or is it PC because of the initial contact being with the offensive player's leg/knee???

Upward motion block IMO

Agree...plus I believe at least one foot was still in the RA as well.

In HS, I'd probably have a block as well but it was close. I think the shooter was airborne while the defender's torso was still coming forward (not yet to the spot).

Albeit it unrelated I got a T for taunting............

I thought the same thing when I saw it on Top 10 plays, but now seeing it again I don't think he lingered there too long; he thought better of it.

Guess I will be calling the T's on our games again this summer !!!!!!;););)

See you in a few months !!!

I think this is a charge.

Until they clarify when actually they are in their upward motion, he does not gather the ball until his last step, I think the defender is there in time.

If it is that close, I am going charge until they clarify this more in the rules or by interpretation.

Peace

I'm with you on all that, however, the last clip makes me believe this is a RA play, which should be a block.

It was certainly very close. It looks like the left foot might be over the RA.

Now was this changed to a block or did the call stand?

Peace

Changed to a block. He shot free throws.

Well that is what is supposed to happen when the defender is in the RA and the secondary defender.

Peace

Does the fact that it's a RA play change everything or would you still have to report both fouls if one of the other officials had signaled block?

Block on defender for not being there prior to start of upward motion.

Block on defender for RA, which of course wouldn't have mattered cause I'm calling this a block.

I believe that's Greg Nixon as the C giving the extra information to the Lead. Nice crew work there.

Yes, the RA overides any PC aspect of the play unless A1 extends his arm or leg/foot into the defender, or unless the defender jumps in an attempt to block the shot.

Secondary Defender

A.R. 92. As A2 makes a drive to the basket, B1, a secondary defender, establishes initial guarding position within the restricted area. Contact occurs. One official calls a charge while another official calls a block.

RULING: B1 was a secondary defender who illegally established initial guarding position within the restricted area. Consequently, the blocking call against B1 is the correct call.
(Rule 4-35 and 10-1.13)

Consequently, this is the first time this year I've seen D-I officials offering information to the calling official as to the position of a secondary defender. It should happen more on the men's side IMO.

Interesting. In the other cases, which call is correct has nothing to do with it.

Because in this case, BY RULE it is a blocking foul. In the other case there is no default call.

. . . just judgement . . . right or wrong . . . or is that right and wrong . . .

It's an entirely different case because in this scenario, it's only a matter of if the defender was in the RA or not.

The ruling is also true in the NBA and NCAA-W with regard to the lower defensive box.