Can we change the charge/block foul?

[sufandu]

I believe that the charge/block call itself is deeply flawed. They seemed to have changed it with the idea that in 95% of those situation, it will be called a block. But sometimes these calls are so close that even slow mo replay is not able to decide it for sure.

What if it's ALWAYS a block no matter what? Players know they cannot try to stop a drive in that way, especially since when they do someone is almost bound to fall down and the chances of injury are severe.

Anyone have a thought on that?

If they can't change it in a way to make it crystal clear, fans are going to continue to feel robbed. It's not a good dynamic. I know nothing about the game of basketball but it seems the change to this rule and the inconsistency in calling it is ruining some very good games.

The problem with "block no matter what" is that you could then get some guard that's built like a tight end barreling people over to get to the basket and there would be nothing the defense could do about it.

 

[CU44SE]

Id much rather see a reduction in the shot clock before any other rule in basketball was changed. The game needs to be sped up, its the slowest basketball in the world; even slower then women's basketball.

 

[BuffOrange]

to me if its close its a clearcut block. the only way it should be a charge is if its OBVIOUSLY a charge. its easy to me, if its close = block. if the offensive player is out of control and barreling into the defender or lowers his should and throws up a wild shot, then its a charge.

to me the worst call in all of sports is when a offensive player makes a great move, SCORES a basket (the actual point of the game) and somehow gets penalized because a defender is STANDING STILL. or slides under him. this isnt just about cj, ive been saying this for years. college basketball rules favor the defense way too much, thats a big reason so many games are in the 50s.

Very much this. To their credit it's pretty much been called that way all year; or was until Tony Greene decided to be a superstar. I can think of one time all year I saw a block called that I thought was a charge - 1st half of our game vs Nova I think.

Wow. Popovic seems like a smart guy. I wonder if he told Ginboli afterwords: "Up 1 on the road is the worst spot in the world to put the onus on the officials - don't ever do that again".

Id much rather see a reduction in the shot clock before any other rule in basketball was changed. The game needs to be sped up, its the slowest basketball in the world; even slower then women's basketball.

Yes that is ridiculous. Particularly given the lack of parity in the women's game - there are like 7 good players in the country spread across 3 teams. If there was ever a game that needed more variance it's that.

 

[SBU72]

I believe that the charge/block call itself is deeply flawed. They seemed to have changed it with the idea that in 95% of those situation, it will be called a block. But sometimes these calls are so close that even slow mo replay is not able to decide it for sure.

What if it's ALWAYS a block no matter what? Players know they cannot try to stop a drive in that way, especially since when they do someone is almost bound to fall down and the chances of injury are severe.

Anyone have a thought on that?

If they can't change it in a way to make it crystal clear, fans are going to continue to feel robbed. It's not a good dynamic. I know nothing about the game of basketball but it seems the change to this rule and the inconsistency in calling it is ruining some very good games.

Make it no harm no foul. If neither player gains an advantage, then why call a foul? If the defender gets in the way and the guy still scores, what advantage? The offensive player runs into the defender but gains no advantage (climbs up?), then why a charge? Yes it may be subjective but not as much as it is now. Defender gets in the way and causes the guy not to score then give shots.

 

[Eagles20]

The biggest contributor to that is the NBA's bullsh!t brand of basketball. The only consistency there is that the stars get every call regardless of who has position where. Then basketball fans will watch NCAA or HS games reffed by officials who try to fairly apply a rule they actually know, and nobody likes the call because it's not what they saw on the NBA game they watched yesterday. That's why players think they can drive regardless of how many are between them and the basket, because they don't understand the difference between the NBA and real basketball. I'd bet most fans don't know there's a different rule book for the NBA, let alone what the differences are and why. You couldn't give me NBA tix even front row courtside.

edit: another part of the NBA's deleterious influence on this is their announcers and former players as color guys (Bill Walton is hardly the only one), none of whom have ever seen the inside of a rule book yet prattle on ad nauseum about what's a rule and how it's supposed to be applied.

The nba refs do a much better job refing contact in the lane that is forced from the offensive player. I can't believe how many times players get bailed out from refs in the NCAA after forcing contact... RAK and BMK get called for a bunch every game. I personally enjoy both college and nba basketball and respect the different styles of both.

 

[Eagles20]

The problem with "block no matter what" is that you could then get some guard that's built like a tight end barreling people over to get to the basket and there would be nothing the defense could do about it.

The secondary defender would just have to challenge the shot, not just causing a collision by getting to spot in front of his path.

 

[sufandu]

The secondary defender would just have to challenge the shot, not just causing a collision by getting to spot in front of his path.

What if the guy just knocks people to the floor and dunks? You can't completely eliminate the charge call.

 

[jncuse]

Personally I think that you need to keep the charge in the game, otherwise there is the possibility of the game just becoming a wrestling match and the stronger team wins by default. I like the fact that the game is a balance of skill, speed, AND strength. I don't want it to be strength first and everything else secondary. If I want that, I'll watch football, which I also love, but for entirely different reasons.

To be honest I think the best way to fix this issue to simply say that a secondary defender CANNOT take a charge. Leave it so the primary defender (on-ball) can take a charge, but a secondary defender cannot simply rotate over and slide under an airborn player.

I also think that lowering the shoulder to slam into the defender for the purposes of creating space should be called more often. I feel like the balance of the calls go towards players being passive defensively (the 'standing in the way' charge), whereas an aggressive defender who is forcefully bodied away with the shoulder slam doesn't often get rewarded for the defense.

Certainly a fair post to counter mine, and I take away my no-charge viewpoint.

But I also think you take away the whole concept of secondary defence in your scenario. Once you beat your man on the perimeter you can do anything to a secondary defender. It doesn't make sense either.

How about some guideline, like 5 feet or something (and before start of offensive move). If you establish position as a help defender while the offender with the ball was still more than 5 feet away from you, and you get run over, that should still be a charge. That gives the opponent time to make another offensive move.

 

[sufandu]

Personally I think that you need to keep the charge in the game, otherwise there is the possibility of the game just becoming a wrestling match and the stronger team wins by default. I like the fact that the game is a balance of skill, speed, AND strength. I don't want it to be strength first and everything else secondary. If I want that, I'll watch football, which I also love, but for entirely different reasons.

To be honest I think the best way to fix this issue to simply say that a secondary defender CANNOT take a charge. Leave it so the primary defender (on-ball) can take a charge, but a secondary defender cannot simply rotate over and slide under an airborn player.

I also think that lowering the shoulder to slam into the defender for the purposes of creating space should be called more often. I feel like the balance of the calls go towards players being passive defensively (the 'standing in the way' charge), whereas an aggressive defender who is forcefully bodied away with the shoulder slam doesn't often get rewarded for the defense.

I don't know that that would work either. The secondary defender isn't always late, so you would then be penalizing a team for making good rotations. This, by the way, would kill us because we are constantly rotating with our defense.

 

[Eagles20]

What if the guy just knocks people to the floor and dunks? You can't completely eliminate the charge call.

Offensive fouls would still be called for a primary defender. I was just talking about the block/charge situation when a secondary defender is involved. Instead of the secondary defender beating him to the spot. I'd rather see them attempt to make a play on the ball. You see a lot of bigs in the nba go straight up vertical and attempt to block or challenge shots more than take charges and that seems a lot safer than having a player collide into another.

 

[sufandu]

Offensive fouls would still be called for a primary defender. I was just talking about the block/charge situation when a secondary defender is involved. Instead of the secondary defender beating him to the spot. I'd rather see them attempt to make a play on the ball. You see a lot of bigs in the nba go straight up vertical and attempt to block or challenge shots more than take charges and that seems a lot safer than having a player collide into another.

I addressed that in the post right before yours. Additionally, if an offensive player knows that, by rule, a secondary defender can't draw a charge, the offensive guy can barrel right over him.

 

[Eagles20]

I addressed that in the post right before yours. Additionally, if an offensive player knows that, by rule, a secondary defender can't draw a charge, the offensive guy can barrel right over him.

You seem pretty hung up with people get barreled over...I would think trying to run people over would put yourself at harm, cause a travel, or put you in a position where scoring wouldn't come easy.

 

[Eagles20]

I addressed that in the post right before yours. Additionally, if an offensive player knows that, by rule, a secondary defender can't draw a charge, the offensive guy can barrel right over him.

I definitely see your point tho...Offensive players would seek out the contact to try and draw the foul by running into the defender. I would say that Jeremi grant has benefited this year by seeking out contact to draw fouls and has taken advantage it. It really is a tough situation for refs judgement. I'm in the camp of those who side with the non obvious to be called a block.

 

[bballbeadle]

Hm. This is not a simple issue, is it?

 

[sufandu]

You seem pretty hung up with people get barreled over...I would think trying to run people over would put yourself at harm, cause a travel, or put you in a position where scoring wouldn't come easy.

I definitely see your point tho...Offensive players would seek out the contact to try and draw the foul by running into the defender. I would say that Jeremi grant has benefited this year by seeking out contact to draw fouls and has taken advantage it. It really is a tough situation for refs judgement. I'm in the camp of those who side with the non obvious to be called a block.

It's not so much as obsession. It's seeing where a hard rule that doesn't allow for any judgement would change the game in a detrimental way. I'm not sure why you keep citing injury as a reason guys wouldn't do it. These guys aren't thinking about injuries when they go to the basket, and if a guy has 30-40 lbs on someone he sees in front of him, he'll certainly be less concerned than the defender, even if the defender has proper position (even a secondary defender).
I pretty much agree with you that, if it's not obvious, it's a block. I think the rule is actually fine as it's written this year. It was completely ignored by our now favorite ref. Changing a rule won't make it any better.

 

[Garbs]

I believe that the charge/block call itself is deeply flawed. They seemed to have changed it with the idea that in 95% of those situation, it will be called a block. But sometimes these calls are so close that even slow mo replay is not able to decide it for sure.

What if it's ALWAYS a block no matter what? Players know they cannot try to stop a drive in that way, especially since when they do someone is almost bound to fall down and the chances of injury are severe.

Anyone have a thought on that?

If they can't change it in a way to make it crystal clear, fans are going to continue to feel robbed. It's not a good dynamic. I know nothing about the game of basketball but it seems the change to this rule and the inconsistency in calling it is ruining some very good games.

said this in another thread, completely agree

remove the judgement part, players would adjust very fast, and it would probably increase scoring and overall enjoyment of games

 

[Garbs]

I don't know that that would work either. The secondary defender isn't always late, so you would then be penalizing a team for making good rotations. This, by the way, would kill us because we are constantly rotating with our defense.

if a secondary defender isn't late he is in position and has not reason to take a charge

The rule needs to be written such that "taking a charge" is not in a players vocabulary. Players should not be rewarded for "taking a charge". If they get charged into absolutely a foul/charge.

I think it is about a player having a clear path, you are either close enough to them where you are the primary defender, or you have to make the decision to go at the player to put yourself in position to be the primary defender or wait for them to get to you an make a play on the ball. Planting yourself in their path should not be allowed, whether you get there in time or not.

 

[Garbs]

I addressed that in the post right before yours. Additionally, if an offensive player knows that, by rule, a secondary defender can't draw a charge, the offensive guy can barrel right over him.

that is the key though, they cannot draw a charge (i.e. the paulus) but he can take a charge if he is in legal guarding position as the primary defender or making a play on the ball

 

[Ozcuse]

The problem with "block no matter what" is that you could then get some guard that's built like a tight end barreling people over to get to the basket and there would be nothing the defense could do about it.

Brandon Triche likes where this is going.

 

[two3zone]

Brandon Triche likes where this is going.

Wasn't a charge at all, the Michigan defender enjoys being tea bagged. Just so happens it was at that point of the game and the referee was jealous that Triche didn't get to him first so he called a foul on Triche.

 

[Garbs]

Hm. This is not a simple issue, is it?

The more I think about it, it is hard to remove the judgement. I think the key is having words that say something along the lines of 'making a play on the ball' or 'in defensive position'

 

[sufandu]

that is the key though, they cannot draw a charge (i.e. the paulus) but he can take a charge if he is in legal guarding position as the primary defender or making a play on the ball

I honestly don't get the whole "it has to be the primary defender" thing. If the "secondary defender" gets into position early enough, ie rotates quickly, the charge should still be in play. If there is any question, it's a block. We, more than anyone wouldn't want the "secondary defender" to not have the charge in play. That would mean if wing player drove past the top of the zone and Rak (the secondary defender) stepped up to pick him up, the guy would know the charge in not in play and could throw his shoulder into Rak, resulting in a blocking foul. There is no way to make this a cut and dry rule. Judgement will always have to be used.

 

[pulaski74]

The idea behind defensive position is supposed to be to make the offensive player either change direction or pull up, its not to draw a charge. The big wigs are trying to get that across to the officials but some do not understand. to slide in front of a player who has already made an offensive move should be a block with the exeptions of a player being out of control, and or lowering the shoulder to initiate contact and gaining an ad vantage

 

[Quazzum69]

If the defender falls over they should be called for a foul because they're obviously faking it. No D1 basketball player should be able to be pushed over when playing defense correctly.

 

[Garbs]

I honestly don't get the whole "it has to be the primary defender" thing. If the "secondary defender" gets into position early enough, ie rotates quickly, the charge should still be in play. If there is any question, it's a block. We, more than anyone wouldn't want the "secondary defender" to not have the charge in play. That would mean if wing player drove past the top of the zone and Rak (the secondary defender) stepped up to pick him up, the guy would know the charge in not in play and could throw his shoulder into Rak, resulting in a blocking foul. There is no way to make this a cut and dry rule. Judgement will always have to be used.

you are describing someone who is now the primary defender