Why have the restricted area arc under the basket if players stepping on it can't be reviewed? | Page 2 | Syracusefan.com

Why have the restricted area arc under the basket if players stepping on it can't be reviewed?

Cuse315Pat

Scout Team
Joined
Dec 31, 2013
Messages
437
Like
429
I disagree. It was clear to me. A friend of mine called right after the call and said did you see that? It was clear to him as well. The annoucers at the game saw it as well. Not a tough call.
Ahh well I actually found a gif that shows the overhead view. His right heel was in fact, not on the ground. The tip of his shoe was just barely in front of the arc with the rest of his foot actually hovering over the line. Leave it to ESPN to not show an angle with any evidence, and fans to find the real footage.
 

Cuse315Pat

Scout Team
Joined
Dec 31, 2013
Messages
437
Like
429
I would love to see a ref call a charge when the shooter flails into the defender on a long shot looking for a call while the defender is just going straight up.

Agree that that bang-bangs are blocks.
What are you talking about? That happens all the time lol. Makes me cringe.
 

Cuse315Pat

Scout Team
Joined
Dec 31, 2013
Messages
437
Like
429
http://www.sbnation.com/college-bas...s-villanova-marquette-iowa-state-kansas-state

Here you go Alsacs. His right foot actually never fully got set in a sense you could say, he only used his toes. If the officials had infact used that angle, it would have been a different call I would think, although I don't know the ruling on "set feet". I don't see why you can't be on your tippy toes, but I'm guessing it's not allowed, which I don't think should matter really, considering his toes were set. He actually lifted the back end of his foot off the ground to make sure he wasn't inside the arc.

But honestly, I'd still like to say that's good defense. But better offense for making the basket. I don't see any reason for there being an arc. If the defender isn't moving, and the player on offense wasn't out of control, I say play on.
 
Last edited:

upperdeck

Living Legend
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
24,862
Like
24,947
I thought the rule for the arc is only applied if the secondary defender is the one inside the arc? that angle sure looks like a charge. there is not other player close to guarding the shooter

hey they didnt review the 3pt shot in the miami game that should have been a 2. never even heard a discussion as to whether its reviewable. at least the one announcer knew it should have only counted as 2..

just take the charge rule out of the game.. its was never intended to be in the rule book anyway and wasnt for many years.
 

Knicks411

Living Legend
Joined
Aug 29, 2011
Messages
13,263
Like
11,510
If it's like the NBA rule, if you raise part of your foot and it's over the line, but not touching it, it counts as touching the line. If that makes sense

hey they didnt review the 3pt shot in the miami game that should have been a 2. never even heard a discussion as to whether its reviewable. at least the one announcer knew it should have only counted as 2..

Don't think you can review it, and not sure it shoul;d have counted for 2. If you count it for 2, you are saying it was touched by the offensive player, in which case, based on where it was, it pretty much has to be a goaltending.
 

Easy Goer

Walk On
Joined
Oct 18, 2011
Messages
104
Like
103
That's the point. His feet moved before the player left the ground, as I stated. He was set just before the Nova player went up for the shot. The Nova player was in his driving form, but he did not yet leave the ground. That's always gonna be a charge. The Nova player took that long last stride to jump off his foot, which gave the defender enough time to set his feet before the jump.

Didn't the rule get changed this year? So when the offensive player's feet leave the ground is not an issue any longer. Isn't it when they start to make their offensive move to the basket (i.e. when the player starts to go up for the shot, not when his feet actually leave the floor)? So if the defensive player was moving when he started to go up, it should be a block.
 

Cuse315Pat

Scout Team
Joined
Dec 31, 2013
Messages
437
Like
429
Didn't the rule get changed this year? So when the offensive player's feet leave the ground is not an issue any longer. Isn't it when they start to make their offensive move to the basket (i.e. when the player starts to go up for the shot, not when his feet actually leave the floor)? So if the defensive player was moving when he started to go up, it should be a block.
I'm not even sure honestly. I don't even think the refs are sure. That's why I wish they would just get rid of the damn arc and call it from there just like a normal shot attempt.
 

Knicks411

Living Legend
Joined
Aug 29, 2011
Messages
13,263
Like
11,510
Yeah it's supposed to be when you start the upward shooting motion
 

Madbiker

2019-20 Iggy Co-Winner Reg Season Rcd
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
7,667
Like
9,908
IMO the replay in the Nova game showed the defender's foot on the line so it should have been a block. I'd like to see the circle expanded out a couple more feet. It's ridiculous that an offensive player can drive to almost the rim and then have a secondary defender slide over and get a charging call under the basket.
 

Eagles20

2nd String
Joined
Aug 20, 2013
Messages
745
Like
963
I thought the rule for the arc is only applied if the secondary defender is the one inside the arc? that angle sure looks like a charge. there is not other player close to guarding the shooter

hey they didnt review the 3pt shot in the miami game that should have been a 2. never even heard a discussion as to whether its reviewable. at least the one announcer knew it should have only counted as 2..

just take the charge rule out of the game.. its was never intended to be in the rule book anyway and wasnt for many years.
The primary defender was the guy who rode him down the side line the whole time... The guy who took the charge came off his man to get into position to take the charge making him what I believe to be a secondary defender.

The whole taking a charge in my mind was never a basketball play. Running over quickly to stop and cause a collision is not a defensive play in my mind. Blocking a shot or challenging a shot at the rim in a defensive play or trying to knock the ball away as the player goes up is a defensive play. The NCAA by bringing the arc and emphasis this year where the offensive player can't be called for a charge once they start going towards the hoop is good for basketball. They are trying to protect players from the collisions under the hoop and have defensive players try to challenge more shots.
 

upperdeck

Living Legend
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
24,862
Like
24,947
As the rule states the charge circle only applies to the secondary defender. so the nova call is correct if you feel he was "stationary" then its a charge. the secondary defender rule does not come into play when the driver has a clear lane to the basket
 

Forum statistics

Threads
161,837
Messages
4,421,748
Members
5,680
Latest member
Ottoman

Online statistics

Members online
40
Guests online
324
Total visitors
364




Top Bottom