Can we get rid of the charge call?
- Thread starter ccyclonepower25
- Start date
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.
The guy sprinted over and flopped. If you watched the replay, Royce barely touched him.
the worst is when the zebras can't decide if it's a block or a charge so they call both... on the same play... in the Elite 8...worst call ever...
sorry in advance
sorry in advance
Can't get rid of a proper charge call (like Ejim into Moore- he was set and had position), but refs need to get them right (Royce had the entire right side of his body around Moore on that one and tried to avoid contact- that is supposed to be a blocking call).
My complaint about charges in when guys slide into legal guarding position when guys are already in the air. That is dangerous and can undercut the offensive player who is most likely looking up at the basket and not down at the defender.
I don't recall that happening tonight, but that's my only problem with it.
And chill out dude.
I thought the charges were actually pretty good last night, but I was aggrevated with the bail-out calls that MU would get when they would go out of control to the basket. When Bubu does the same thing... no-call. When Scotty goes to the basket and actually is in control and gets hacked like crazy... no call. 
JUST BE CONSISTENT!!!!!!!!!!:realmad:
JUST BE CONSISTENT!!!!!!!!!!:realmad:
Disagree. The defensive man never ever established a set position. The defensive man was constantly moving. That is not a charge. But a blocking foul.
When was the last time they called a blocking foul on a Royce White drive to the basket. The Defense is moving and the Refs have the biased mindset to always call a Charge.
And Scotty continually got hammered going down the lane.
Stormin, you disagree because you've never read the rule book. You do NOT have to be set to draw a charge. You can also be moving at the point of contact. These misconceptions have been put out there by the media because THEY have not read the rules. I'm not being a smartass, go look up the rules and see what they say.
Here's exactly what they say. :wink:
ART. 1 . . . Guarding is the act of legally placing the body in the path of an
offensive opponent. There is no minimum distance required between the guard
and opponent, but the maximum is 6 feet when closely guarded. Every player is
entitled to a spot on the playing court provided such player gets there first
without illegally contacting an opponent. A player who extends an arm, shoulder,
hip or leg into the path of an opponent is not considered to have a legal position
if contact occurs.
ART. 2 . . . To obtain an initial legal guarding position:
a. The guard must have both feet touching the playing court.
b. The front of the guard’s torso must be facing the opponent.
ART. 3 . . . After the initial legal guarding position is obtained:
a. The guard may have one or both feet on the playing court or be airborne,
provided he/she has inbound status.
b. The guard is not required to continue facing the opponent.
c. The guard may move laterally or obliquely to maintain position, provided it
is not toward the opponent when contact occurs.
d. The guard may raise hands or jump within his/her own vertical plane.
e. The guard may turn or duck to absorb the shock of imminent contact.
ART. 4 . . . Guarding an opponent with the ball or a stationary opponent without
the ball:
a. No time or distance is required to obtain an initial legal position.
b. If the opponent with the ball is airborne, the guard must have obtained legal
position before the opponent left the floor.
ART. 5 . . . Guarding a moving opponent without the ball:
a. Time and distance are factors required to obtain an initial legal position.
b. The guard must give the opponent the time and/or distance to avoid contact.
c. The distance need not be more than two strides.
d. If the opponent is airborne, the guard must have obtained legal position
before the opponent left the floor.
You are exactly right on this, and the rule book even says you are correct that a defender who establishes position after the offensive player has left the floor is guilty of a block.
I brought this up in a discussion here a couple weeks ago, and a ref who posts here said that he was told by Rick Hartzell at an officiating clinic that he -paraphrasing now- ignores how this rule is written in the book and calls it how he sees fit. And the ref here implied that he does the same thing.
How many establish after someone has left the floor? Not very many. The split second they're in the air doesn't allow for it.
That was me. If a defender CLEARLY slides in after a shooter is airborne, of course it is a block and I'll call it that way. But the vast majority of these situations are lightning fast bang-bang plays and you have to have some rules of thumb or "absolutes." For RH, myself and a lot of guys that absolute is chest-to-chest contact. Will it be 100% correct every time? No. But it will be right 99% of the time and, I'm sorry, but that's good enough.
That's what I thought. It looked to me like Moore was the one who was out of control and was already falling over on his own before Royce bumped him on the way up for the shot.
