Can we get rid of the charge call?

**acrozier22** · 02-29-2012, 11:01 PM

Originally Posted by Yellow Snow

Correct me if i am wrong, but i think the intent of adding the "no charge" circle was implemented to stop that Duke style move of having an off ball defender slide over and stand under the rim.

Basically, the offensive player can't get to the rim without running that guy over (even to just shoot a layup), and the off ball defender will get to that spot faster EVERY TIME. Nothing looks more ridiculous than a dude standing under the net holding his nuts waiting for a guy who actually BEAT his defender to knock him over.

Right, that's why I like the 1/2 circle in the lane.

I was referring more to defense being played outside of the lane by the primary defender.

**acrozier22** · 02-29-2012, 11:03 PM

Originally Posted by ajk4st8

By 'intentionally drawing a foul'.... i meant when the player stands still in front of another player and flops backwards at the instant of contact. years ago there was a rule that penalized players for faking getting fouled, If I remember correctly.

Dude, I know the rules... its my fault for not being clear here.

Obviously you have to allow defenders to have equal opportunity to the floor.

Ever seen an official motion for a player to get up after a flop? It actually happens quite often. It's a tough call. Officials try to get it right but it's the fastest call in all of sports.

**IdahoCyclone** · 02-29-2012, 11:04 PM

Can’t tell if this thread is a joke.

**ajk4st8** · 02-29-2012, 11:04 PM

Originally Posted by acrozier22

Ever seen an official motion for a player to get up after a flop? It actually happens quite often. It's a tough call. Officials try to get it right but it's the fastest call in all of sports.

The real problem is there is no punishment for 'faking'

**JUKEBOX** · 02-29-2012, 11:05 PM

Getting rid of charges is a really dumb idea. However, punishing flops needs to happen. Also, players who jump into the defense to try and draw fouls (aka Keiton Page) should be punished as well.

**Yellow Snow** · 02-29-2012, 11:13 PM

Originally Posted by ajk4st8

By 'intentionally drawing a foul'.... i meant when the player stands still in front of another player and flops backwards at the instant of contact. years ago there was a rule that penalized players for faking getting fouled, If I remember correctly.

Dude, I know the rules... its my fault for not being clear here.

Obviously you have to allow defenders to have equal opportunity to the floor.

I hear what you are saying. The only problem with penalizing players for supposedly faking is that you are again asking the official to make another subjective call. Was it fake? Was it not?

I guarantee that the first time one of our guys got a T (or whatever) for a fake flop we'd be freaking out about that ref screwing us. I think it's fine the way it is. Let the officials do their jobs.

Personally, I think it would be an easier call to make if I didn't have to guess intent (fake or not). By calling a block or charge, i'm effectively making that choice already. If a dude flops, i don't call the charge. Without replay, we don't gain anything because we open up a whole new can of worms.

**tm3308** · 02-29-2012, 11:13 PM

Originally Posted by andybernard

I think it should only be called if the offensive player is out of control when a defender is actually trying to play defense. The sliding underneath a player going up for a shot in hopes of getting a charge call is ridiculously dumb.

Which is why that's a blocking foul. Charging is an important rule to have. It levels the playing field, like offensive pass interference.

**IdahoCyclone** · 02-29-2012, 11:39 PM

There are a lot of problems with the charge, but they don’t need to be brought up after this game. We didn’t lose because of the two charge fouls. Royce usually complains after every call similar to scott and bubu, but I think Royce actually knows what he is talking about. Scotty’s two hand what was that really pisses me off. Get back and play some defense man.

**Clonefan94** · 02-29-2012, 11:56 PM

Originally Posted by andybernard

I think it should only be called if the offensive player is out of control when a defender is actually trying to play defense. The sliding underneath a player going up for a shot in hopes of getting a charge call is ridiculously dumb.

In my day, and every ref on here is going to disagree with me, but in my day, It was explained to me by a ref that I had to establish position in front of the guy with the ball. Not just put my foot there before he did. Too many times today it seems like they love to make the call because the guy stepped in front of him. There is a huge difference between a blocking foul and a charge foul, but no one seems to notice that now adays.

And I agree with you, the call was put in place to eliminate out of control plays. Too many times it's about the guy putting his foot down first and there is a big difference between getting your foot in there first and actually establishing position. Take a look at hockey, it's a good rule to follow.

**Goothrey** · 02-29-2012, 11:59 PM

Dumb idea. That said...

We've been on the sour end of a lot of blocking and charging calls this year. I don't see how Royce charged against Mizzou. Was he out of control? No. Did he push off? No. Did he lower his shoulder? No. Did the defensive player have his feet set? No. I don't get it.

**Clonefan94** · 03-01-2012, 12:03 AM

Originally Posted by Goothrey

Dumb idea. That said...

We've been on the sour end of a lot of blocking and charging calls this year. I don't see how Royce charged against Mizzou. Was he out of control? No. Did he push off? No. Did he lower his shoulder? No. Did the defensive player have his feet set? No. I don't get it.

Exactly.

**acrozier22** · 03-01-2012, 12:11 AM

Originally Posted by Goothrey

Dumb idea. That said...

We've been on the sour end of a lot of blocking and charging calls this year. I don't see how Royce charged against Mizzou. Was he out of control? No. Did he push off? No. Did he lower his shoulder? No. Did the defensive player have his feet set? No. I don't get it.

Common misconception. You dont' need to have your feet set. You need to have legal guarding position.

In the case of Royce's charge, the guy established position and Royce ran him over. It was the right call.

**tm3308** · 03-01-2012, 12:19 AM

Originally Posted by acrozier22

Common misconception. You dont' need to have your feet set. You need to have legal guarding position.

In the case of Royce's charge, the guy established position and Royce ran him over. It was the right call.

I was just about to post this, regarding having position.

**Goothrey** · 03-01-2012, 12:19 AM

Originally Posted by acrozier22

Common misconception. You dont' need to have your feet set. You need to have legal guarding position.

In the case of Royce's charge, the guy established position and Royce ran him over. It was the right call.

I don't think Moore was in good position. He was backing up trying to keep up with Royce and fell over because he is a fat boy. I've seen that called a blocking foul on our own guys.

**JUKEBOX** · 03-01-2012, 01:49 AM

Originally Posted by acrozier22

Common misconception. You dont' need to have your feet set. You need to have legal guarding position.

In the case of Royce's charge, the guy established position and Royce ran him over. It was the right call.

The guy sprinted over and flopped. If you watched the replay, Royce barely touched him.