Originally Posted by letemplay (Post 956350)

I'm not saying the defender is not entitled to a spot on the floor if he gets there first. I'm asking what your criteria are for judging this. More and more I'm seeing, as I said, the offensive player changing his path and the defender almost launching to that spot in hopes of beating him there. You guys are saying in this play he did not, that by rule he had LGP and I'm in disagreement. That's not a dangerous position to have and I'd love to be educated here. Tell me how, what are the tell tale signs, you are seeing that the Duke player got there ahead of the offensive player? My question: When does LGP end such that a different position must be obtained to repossess LGP? Someone said the dribbler merely turned his shoulders a bit and that would not merit the need for defensive repositioning. Way back when, like the song says "when Coke was a Coke", thing's were simpler. You did have to be set and that was the parameter used to officiate this play, and it made sense. Offense sees his path blocked, changes direction to a different path, defender must readjust as well. Maybe our only disagreement here is the distance in which we believe the dribbler is changing his path. If all of you that say this is an easy PC call are seeing the dribbler basically maintaining same line of attack then yes I can understand. If you can at least acknowledge that the offensive player is attempting to make almost a 90 degree left turn (ok give me 45) then surely there are some of you that might feel the defense has blocked his path illegally. I know all this language of after LGP his feet don't have to be set, blah blah..I don't think always refers to this play. I believe he should have to be set..or I guess reset. He's about to get blown by and his only hope is to throw his body there jutting his chest out and taking the hit. I mean he is jumping to a different spot and one foot still I n the air trying to head to that spot. Somebody said he shouldda just pulled up and shot a jumper...jeez

Originally Posted by letemplay (Post 956350)

Way back when, like the song says "when Coke was a Coke", thing's were simpler. You did have to be set and that was the parameter used to officiate this play, and it made sense.

Originally Posted by letemplay (Post 956317)

Sorry, but I will once again differ entirely from most if not ALL of your opinions here. Fry me if you want, and I'm not saying the incorrect call was made by today's rules/interps on the b/c plays, but I'm gonna stick up for the offensive player(s) on this one. What's a guy supposed to do? The VT player's dribbling in a straight line towards his basket, the defensive player takes a position in that line (LGP), dribbler sees path blocked and CHANGES PATH, planting his right foot and begins to make move to his left to go by defender, who reacts to this move by throwing himself into this NEW path. Sure he takes it in the chest from the offensive player, cuz he put himself there, leaving no chance whatsoever for the dribbler to do anything else. And for those of you saying the dribbler was responsible because he ducked and lowered his shoulder, try dribbling in a little traffic and make a crossover and do it standing up and not going into a bit of a forward lean..it's a natural movement. When he decided to go to his left there was space and he got into that space, only to encounter the defender has thrown himself there. IMO, to call plays this way is just wrong and is taking away from the game. I know by rule no time and distance are needed, but I would argue that there should be. It is NOT what I feel the player control fouls were originally written for: to give a defender a legit chance of standing his ground on a guy intent on driving to basket or any other spot regardless of anyone in his way.
Contrast this Duke-VT play (and countless others like it) with a play last night where Lebron is called for a block on a Curry drive (prob midways thru 3rd Q)..look at that and decide which defender did more to impede guy with ball. Maybe NBA looks at this differently...
I know this has been debated over and over here and sure looks like I'm the lone ranger on this once again, but I'm not gonna change my opinion of it:(