New Orleans Pelicans vs GSW Game 2 Block/Charge (Video)

[MD Longhorn]

I have a block too - he never stops moving left and into the dribbler. I see no LGP here ever.

[BryanV21]

Throw in another vote for "block"

[Rich1]

I know its the NBA so this logic probably doesn't apply but if the ref had called the foul by Wht 9 as Blk 1 was dribbling into the lane then the block/charge debate would be nonexistant. Call it a hand check or a hold but the contact by #9 causes the loose ball that put the offensive team at a disadvantage by limiting the dribblers movements, preventing him from taking his path to the goal, and almost resulted in a turn over.

This is why we should always get the first foul. It will not only help control the game but in many cases, just like this one, the offense is unfairly punished when they get called for the foul that follows.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Rich1

I know its the NBA so this logic probably doesn't apply but if the ref had called the foul by Wht 9 as Blk 1 was dribbling into the lane then the block/charge debate would be nonexistant. Call it a hand check or a hold but the contact by #9 causes the loose ball that put the offensive team at a disadvantage by limiting the dribblers movements, preventing him from taking his path to the goal, and almost resulted in a turn over.

This is why we should always get the first foul. It will not only help control the game but in many cases, just like this one, the offense is unfairly punished when they get called for the foul that follows.

Yes, I think a late whistle once he lost the ball wouldn't have been a bad call.

Charge from the slot's angle, block from the overhead view. Just goes to show you how poor of a view C/slot has of block/charge plays like this.

Like this play for example. Pretty clear block shown on the video screen but Breeding couldn't see the lateral movement from C. Now whether DeRosa actually had a whistle initially or made something up is another story...

[MechanicGuy]

Originally Posted by AremRed

Charge from the slot's angle, block from the overhead view. Just goes to show you how poor of a view C/slot has of block/charge plays like this.

Like this play for example. Pretty clear block shown on the video screen but Breeding couldn't see the lateral movement from C. Now whether DeRosa actually had a whistle initially or made something up is another story...

There's a lot weird going on on that play. Breeding has no fist in the air and seemed really hesitant to make any call.

[APG]

Originally Posted by MechanicGuy

There's a lot weird going on on that play. Breeding has no fist in the air and seemed really hesitant to make any call.

He was hesistant cause he heard DeRosa's (trail) whistle...and wanted to avoid a blarge....but DeRosa had a hit by the backside defender before his "charge"...which is fortunate. The play was absolutely a block.

[jeremy341a]

Originally Posted by AremRed

Charge from the slot's angle, block from the overhead view. Just goes to show you how poor of a view C/slot has of block/charge plays like this.

Like this play for example. Pretty clear block shown on the video screen but Breeding couldn't see the lateral movement from C. Now whether DeRosa actually had a whistle initially or made something up is another story...

This is why I thought it was interesting. Watching it live I didn't think much about it but when shown from the overhead the view was much different.

[griblets]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

I see no LGP here ever.

At 0:16 into the video, LGP is established:

1) both feet touching the playing court

2) front of torso facing the opponent


I don't think it's "definitely a block" as some have said. In the moment, and my first instinct, I almost certainly would have called a block based on the overhead view, but I'm not sure that would be right. I think there is room for healthy debate here.

At 0:17, W5's left foot had beaten B23 to the spot. W5's left leg was within the width of his torso (are we initially being fooled by his right foot being left outside his shoulder width to the right?). B23 never gets his head and shoulders around W5's torso when contact occurs. I may have talked myself into PC.

Anybody else think this may be PC, and why?

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by griblets

At 0:16 into the video, LGP is established:

1) both feet touching the playing court

2) front of torso facing the opponent


I don't think it's "definitely a block" as some have said. In the moment, and my first instinct, I almost certainly would have called a block based on the overhead view, but I'm not sure that would be right. I think there is room for healthy debate here.

At 0:17, W5's left foot had beaten B23 to the spot. W5's left leg was within the width of his torso (are we initially being fooled by his right foot being left outside his shoulder width to the right?). B23 never gets his head and shoulders around W5's torso when contact occurs. I may have talked myself into PC.

Anybody else think this may be PC, and why?

I agree with you that is not a cut-n-dry block. I do not see the defender moving into A1, I see lateral movement by the defender. Who got to the spot first, and was LGP ever established?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

I agree with you that is not a cut-n-dry block. I do not see the defender moving into A1, I see lateral movement by the defender. Who got to the spot first, and was LGP ever established?

I see it the way you do, but I don't think he established LGP because he wasn't in the path of the dribbler.

[mutantducky]

Warriors fan...and watching the warriors broadcast. Along with the local announcers I thought that it probably should have been a block call. It was close but if you start calling charges on those you are going to get way too many players jumping in the paths of the offensive players.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by mutantducky

It was close but if you start calling charges on those you are going to get way too many players jumping in the paths of the offensive players.

He's putting us on, right.