Block/charge rule change

[TheC]

Am I the only one that hates this new rule? The change that the player now has to be in a set position during pre-game warm-ups in order for it to be a charge has really taken one of the more exciting plays on defense out of the game. What bugs me the most is that the refs are now erring on the side of calling everything a block. That call on Clayton yesterday was awful. Clayton got himself set, made himself a drink, and then got run over by the PSU player, only to be called for the block. I then saw the same thing happen in the Iowa-Minnesota game later on. Another awful block call.

The rule is confusing to me. I can't remember if it was Hummel or Morris in the Iowa game who kept saying that the player has to be set before the offensive player puts down his plant foot to jump. If that is the case, that happens after the player starts to gather the ball. He usually take one to two more steps before taking off, so you shouldn't have to be set on the gather. In Clayton's case, I think he was set even before the gather.

If they are going to keep this dumb rule, then I think it should be reviewable immediately after the call just like a goaltending is reviewable. It is really frustrating when a player gives himself up like that and doesn't get rewarded, especially when he totally deserves it as I saw in both games yesterday.

 

[GatoLouco]

the refs are now erring on the side of calling everything a block

The rule itself is easier to understand than what you are describing. I had to think it through myself when I first saw it but it quickly becomes apparent what they mean.

Before you had to be set before the offensive player left to floor. Now you have to be set before he last plants his foot.

The problem as I see it is that the old rule was way, way easier to spot and judge. The new rule is one that I wonder how in the world can they call it with any degree of confidence. And that is why I agree with you that it seems we are just in the mode of calling everything a block.

 

[TheC]

The rule itself is easy easier to understand than what you are describing. I had to think it through myself when I first saw it but it quickly becomes apparent what they mean.

Before you have to be set before they offensive player left to floor. Now you have to be set before he last plants his foot.

The problem as I see it is that the old rule was way, way easier to spot and judge. The new rule is one that I wonder how in the world can they call it with any degree of confidence. And that is why I agree with you that it seems we are just in the mode of calling everything a block.

Right, that's how I understand it too. But when the player starts to gather the ball, he usually takes at least one more step, which is his plant foot. So, if you are set as the player starts to gather, then it should be a charge as the plant foot hasn't come down yet.

I agree with you though, that is almost impossible for the ref to see both in a split second. It really should be reviewable.

 

[hollandnucat]

It is a horrible rule. Seeing obvious charges being called blocking calls is infuriating as there is nothing the defender can do. I hate this rule even more than the euro step (traveling in traditional rules) and the lack of calling 3 seconds any more.

 

[AdamOnFirst]

I completely fail to understand why they wanted to give driving offensive players even MORE benefit of the doubt in basketball than they already get when contact occurs.

 

[Zootcat]

The rule itself is easy easier to understand than what you are describing. I had to think it through myself when I first saw it but it quickly becomes apparent what they mean.

Before you have to be set before they offensive player left to floor. Now you have to be set before he last plants his foot.

The problem as I see it is that the old rule was way, way easier to spot and judge. The new rule is one that I wonder how in the world can they call it with any degree of confidence. And that is why I agree with you that it seems we are just in the mode of calling everything a block.

It’s really frustrating for fans in the stands to know what is fair/isn’t fair live. After the call on Clayton, frustrated, I turned to my wife and said “I have no idea how they call that rule anymore.”

 

[SmellyCat]

Right...it just LOOKS like a charge, and even if they show the replay in slow motion and technically it's a block based on the new interpretation, it still looks "wrong," so it's easy to see why fans (especially those at the game) would be up in arms about how it's being called.

 

[PurpleWhiteBoy]

The call against Clayton was just a really bad call.
As Gato and others have explained, the defender has to have his feet set before the offensive player plants his foot to go up for a shot. Clayton did that, no doubt. An obvious charge, even with the new rule.

It stops defenders from sliding in and drawing a bogus charge against a guy whose momentum is guaranteed to carry him into that space.

If they want to amend the rule so that if Nicholson is the defender, its a charge, thats cool with me too.

 

[loyolacat]

If I got this right there are two reasons. 1. Is to give the refs something definitive (dont know if it meets the purpose) so as to be more consistent and 2. Safety, to limit the number of train wrecks. My understanding is that the defensive player has to give the offensive player room to land. So the offensive player owns not only the space he is physically occupying but the area where he is going to occupy after he jumps.....UNLESS the defensive player occupies it b4 the offensive player starts his jump by planting his foot. Advantage has definitely gone to the offensive players recently starting with trying to eliminate hand guarding and chest bumping...Dont know if the new interpretations have helped as it still seems unclear a lot. Guess you would have to ask the officials if they think it is easier to make the call consistently...or coaches but they are like us fans...the ref always has it wrong.

 

[elgatoloco]

If I got this right there are two reasons. 1. Is to give the refs something definitive (dont know if it meets the purpose) so as to be more consistent and 2. Safety, to limit the number of train wrecks. My understanding is that the defensive player has to give the offensive player room to land. So the offensive player owns not only the space he is physically occupying but the area where he is going to occupy after he jumps.....UNLESS the defensive player occupies it b4 the offensive player starts his jump by planting his foot. Advantage has definitely gone to the offensive players recently starting with trying to eliminate hand guarding and chest bumping...Dont know if the new interpretations have helped as it still seems unclear a lot. Guess you would have to ask the officials if they think it is easier to make the call consistently...or coaches but they are like us fans...the ref always has it wrong.

More than just chest bumping--a 5'9" point guard can fly into a 6'10" center who has remained vertical and manufacture two FTs.

 

[Hungry Jack]

The call on Clayton sent me spiraling into a fit of apoplexy, which was quickly followed by venomous bellowing from the balcony. A friend who had moved with his son into the student section below us said he heard me well, which is heartening as I think the referee on our side was likely able to experience my visceral displeasure.

Yelling at officials is a Northwestern birthright.

 

[NJCat]

Yelling at Blaming officials is a Northwestern Purdue birthright.

FIFY

 

[clarificationcat]

It is a horrible rule. Seeing obvious charges being called blocking calls is infuriating as there is nothing the defender can do. I hate this rule even more than the euro step (traveling in traditional rules) and the lack of calling 3 seconds any more.

I will gladly accept this change in exchange for the change to the rule of verticality. Attempting to block a shot is a basketball play. Beating the ballhandler to the spot is a basketball play. Standing under someone as they attempt to shoot or pass is not a basketball play in my view.

Completely agree, though, the refs blew the call on Clayton. Even live at the game, it was clear Clayton was set before the shooter planted his foot.

 

[EagerFan]

I don't like the rule because it seems to me the result has been a lot more out of control ball handlers leaping into defenders with no intent of taking a shot, just generating a blocking foul on what should be a charge. Seems like the rule change has actually made things more dangerous for the playing, including the dope with the ball.

 

[WildcatWillie]

I called high school ball for three decades, and back then the mantra for officials was "Referee the defense." (Meaning: determine the defender's established position instead of focusing primarily on the dribbler/driver.) It made the whole block/charge call easier, or so we thought.

Truthfully, I'm unsure that mindset is being taught or practiced as much now. Whether that's for good or ill, I dunno.

Interestingly, I saw a Div I game in my neighborhood last week in which SEVEN charge calls had been made by midway in the 2nd half. (After that I stopped counting.) The first couple of times drew some flack from coaches, but from then on they didn't seem to utter a peep. It was as if players were being rewarded for playing legit defense, and coaches almost always appreciate that. It was a different look and a good many fans were bitching and moaning. I, however, was impressed and by the end of the close game, out-of-control drives seem to have been reduced.

 

[Gatabowl]

It is a horrible rule. Seeing obvious charges being called blocking calls is infuriating as there is nothing the defender can do. I hate this rule even more than the euro step (traveling in traditional rules) and the lack of calling 3 seconds any more.

The eurostep isn’t traveling. It’s traveling if the player travels when trying to do it.

 

[clarificationcat]

I don't like the rule because it seems to me the result has been a lot more out of control ball handlers leaping into defenders with no intent of taking a shot, just generating a blocking foul on what should be a charge. Seems like the rule change has actually made things more dangerous for the playing, including the dope with the ball.

I called high school ball for three decades, and back then the mantra for officials was "Referee the defense." (Meaning: determine the defender's established position instead of focusing primarily on the dribbler/driver.) It made the whole block/charge call easier, or so we thought.

Truthfully, I'm unsure that mindset is being taught or practiced as much now. Whether that's for good or ill, I dunno.

Interestingly, I saw a Div I game in my neighborhood last week in which SEVEN charge calls had been made by midway in the 2nd half. (After that I stopped counting.) The first couple of times drew some flack from coaches, but from then on they didn't seem to utter a peep. It was as if players were being rewarded for playing legit defense, and coaches almost always appreciate that. It was a different look and a good many fans were bitching and moaning. I, however, was impressed and by the end of the close game, out-of-control drives seem to have been reduced.

I’m clearly in the minority but I would be happy if the new rule encouraged coaches to start teaching players to make a play on the ball rather than trying to stand under the guy leaving his feet. Then out-of-control shooters would not get bailed out and the game would be a little safer. Jump straight up with your hands up.

 

[TheC]

I’m clearly in the minority but I would be happy if the new rule encouraged coaches to start teaching players to make a play on the ball rather than trying to stand under the guy leaving his feet. Then out-of-control shooters would not get bailed out and the game would be a little safer. Jump straight up with your hands up.

I feel like that's almost a guaranteed foul. Unless your that #22 for Penn State the other day, moving contact on the shooter is almost always called on the defender. I think it's so hard to keep body control to go straight up that guys lean a little whether they realize it or not.

 

[EagerFan]

The problem isn't guys trying to stand under a shooter leaving his feet. The problem is blocking fouls being called now when ball handlers are leaping into defenders who are either already backing away (but not fast enough to dodge the leap) or have already set their feet and stand their ground.

Look at the foul called on Brooks where he is literally standing still with his hands up in the air while the PSU guy scrambles around his feet, jumps into him, and misses an uncontested shot - foul on the motionless Brooks. Or the call against Clayton where he is in position and his feet are set with his hands up while the ball handler is still driving towards him, takes two more steps and then jumps into him. Foul on Clayton.

Guys who step under a shooter already in the air are bad people and bad things should happen to them imho. That's not what the complaints are about.

 

[SDakaGordie]

I’m clearly in the minority but I would be happy if the new rule encouraged coaches to start teaching players to make a play on the ball rather than trying to stand under the guy leaving his feet. Then out-of-control shooters would not get bailed out and the game would be a little safer. Jump straight up with your hands up.

It sounds to me like we are blaming defenders for (getting in a good position and) potentially “endangering” the offensive player by getting “under him”. It’s the offensive player’s choice to go up and into a defenders space. They take the risk and should be penalized if they do invade the defender’s rightful space, whether on the ground or in the air. Move around the defender or pass it, or get ready to incur a charge.

 

[PurpleWhiteBoy]

It sounds to me like we are blaming defenders for (getting in a good position and) potentially “endangering” the offensive player by getting “under him”. It’s the offensive player’s choice to go up and into a defenders space. They take the risk and should be penalized if they do invade the defender’s rightful space, whether on the ground or in the air. Move around the defender or pass it, or get ready to incur a charge.

Personally, I hated the DUKE way of drawing charges.
Slide in late under a guy who has already committed to going up (and can't stop).

So this new rule is meant to prevent that, now that Coach K is retired.
If you are driving toward the basket and you plant your foot with momentum going forward, you have committed. The defender has to be in position or its a foul on him.

So I think that is correct. The rule is correct, not the officials bad calls.

But when a shooter initiates contact with a defender while both are moving, please don't call a foul.
If a guy uses his non-shooting arm to brush aside the defenders arm, please don't call a foul.
If a defender jumps straight up to and the shooter plows into him, please don't call a foul.
If a jump shooter kicks his leg out to draw contact, please don't call a foul.

 

[clarificationcat]

It sounds to me like we are blaming defenders for (getting in a good position and) potentially “endangering” the offensive player by getting “under him”. It’s the offensive player’s choice to go up and into a defenders space. They take the risk and should be penalized if they do invade the defender’s rightful space, whether on the ground or in the air. Move around the defender or pass it, or get ready to incur a charge.

That's why they changed the rule to needing to be set before the ball handler plants his foot. If the defender is not set before the ball handler plants his foot, it's hard to adjust your body once you have planted to jump.

I am questioning whether standing motionless in a spot is a basketball move. And as I said, I may be the only one on this board who feels this way, so this will be my last point. I think everyone else in in agreement. I'd rather see the defender make a play on the ball handler before the ball handler takes off or jump straight in the air and contest the shot. I love the rule of verticality. I think it's made the game better. And you don't have to be so many feet away from the basket for it to apply.

 

[HailToPurple]

...The change that the player now has to be in a set position during pre-game warm-ups in order for it to be a charge has really taken one of the more exciting plays on defense out of the game. ...

I don't understand what pre-game warm-ups have anything to do with a call during the game. It doesn't make any sense at all.

 

[mekCat]

The concept in play here is called hyperbole. TheC was masterful in its use.

 

[hdhntr1]

Personally, I hated the DUKE way of drawing charges.
Slide in late under a guy who has already committed to going up (and can't stop).

So this new rule is meant to prevent that, now that Coach K is retired.
If you are driving toward the basket and you plant your foot with momentum going forward, you have committed. The defender has to be in position or its a foul on him.

So I think that is correct. The rule is correct, not the officials bad calls.

But when a shooter initiates contact with a defender while both are moving, please don't call a foul.
If a guy uses his non-shooting arm to brush aside the defenders arm, please don't call a foul.
If a defender jumps straight up to and the shooter plows into him, please don't call a foul.
If a jump shooter kicks his leg out to draw contact, please don't call a foul.

Make that don't call a foul on the defender Some of those should be called on the offensive guy or not called at all