Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 38 of 38

Thread: Block-Charge

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    20 Minutes From The Heaven That Is Cameron Indoor
    Quote Originally Posted by FellowTraveler View Post
    I don't understand the premise. To be "in a position by which the ref will grant them a charge," players have to be positioned to "stop the offensive player" from proceeding along his desired path. When a defensive player positions himself so that, for an example, an offensive player cannot get to the basket, that is very much "playing defense."

    Another way of thinking of it: Why is what you describe "not playing defense" but screen-setting isn't "not playing offense"?
    Agree. As my High School coach said a thousand times over, "Son, you play defense with your feet, not your hands. Reaching in for steal attempts is lazy and will rack up foul calls".

    I hate flopping as much as the next person, but sliding your feet to stay in front of the offensive player is the very core of good defense.

    "[T]he tarnished Tar Heels that bear little resemblance to the revered program built by Dean Smith."- Ashville Times
    "UNC and the NCAA are trying to conceal that the fraud was specifically designed to pad the transcripts of varsity athletes" - Bloomberg

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Cary, NC
    Quote Originally Posted by rsvman View Post
    Those who are arguing that "taking a charge" isn't a "basketball play" need to have a talk with Coach K. I guarantee you he sees it differently. Our guys not only take charges frequently, they practice taking charges. They are coached to take charges. Taking a charge is a turnover PLUS a foul on a opposing player. It's not only a basketball play, it's a huge basketball play.
    Duke absolutely draws a ton of charges and it's a huge component of our defense. But the reason we do it is because of the way the rules are written and interpreted. If we didn't get those calls, we wouldn't do it. And that's what we're discussing here, changing the rules so that certain plays are no longer charges. If that were to happen, Coach K would adjust.

    I'm as big a Duke fan as there is but that doesn't mean I like everything that we do. And I would prefer that we played stronger, straight up D rather than falling over to draw a charge.

  3. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by Newton_14 View Post
    Agree. As my High School coach said a thousand times over, "Son, you play defense with your feet, not your hands."

    I hate flopping as much as the next person, but sliding your feet to stay in front of the offensive player is the very core of good defense.
    Maybe we should distinguish between [1] defending your own man with good footwork-positioning, and [2] sliding over to place yourself in the path of a driver to the hoop who is not your man.

    According to this distinction, maybe we could all agree that [1] is good D when executed properly, and we'd applaud a charge call; whereas [2] is a play we'd like to see a whole lot less of.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Durham
    Quote Originally Posted by gumbomoop View Post
    Maybe we should distinguish between [1] defending your own man with good footwork-positioning, and [2] sliding over to place yourself in the path of a driver to the hoop who is not your man.

    According to this distinction, maybe we could all agree that [1] is good D when executed properly, and we'd applaud a charge call; whereas [2] is a play we'd like to see a whole lot less of.
    Why are you not allowed to defend someone else's man? should we ban help defense and double teaming entirely? the game doesn't HAVE to be played one on one....and to take away the ability of a smart defense to contain a surperior offensive individual with good team work would not only take away most of what it means to play defense at duke, but also would be a huge detraction from the game as a whole.....
    usa

  5. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by uh_no View Post
    Why are you not allowed to defend someone else's man? should we ban help defense and double teaming entirely? the game doesn't HAVE to be played one on one....and to take away the ability of a smart defense to contain a surperior offensive individual with good team work would not only take away most of what it means to play defense at duke, but also would be a huge detraction from the game as a whole.....
    Yes, good point. I didn't intend that the distinction I drew should prohibit team defense or double teaming. I guess the "sliding over" into the path of a different player example might be part of team defense, but it doesn't seem to fit the normal understanding of double-teaming.

    As for team defense, this "sliding over" isn't what I first think of, or maybe even second. Instead, I think first of switching, communication, funneling opponents into spaces where they don't want to be, cutting off passing lanes. But maybe this "sliding over" to take a charge, because now so widely practiced, has become emblematic of team defense.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Durham, NC
    Quote Originally Posted by gumbomoop View Post
    Yes, good point. I didn't intend that the distinction I drew should prohibit team defense or double teaming. I guess the "sliding over" into the path of a different player example might be part of team defense, but it doesn't seem to fit the normal understanding of double-teaming.

    As for team defense, this "sliding over" isn't what I first think of, or maybe even second. Instead, I think first of switching, communication, funneling opponents into spaces where they don't want to be, cutting off passing lanes. But maybe this "sliding over" to take a charge, because now so widely practiced, has become emblematic of team defense.
    I don't think "sliding over," in itself, is necessarily the problem. If a guard gets past his man on the perimeter, it makes sense for another defender to rotate in order to defend the path to the basket, sometimes taking a charge when the driver is out of control. I think everyone would agree that this is well within the game of basketball.

    Instead, I think the problem people are trying to key in on is not sliding over, but sliding under: when the defender jumps into the path of the driver after he has already committed to a scoring move, specifically to take a charge, rather than trying to defend the path to the basket (a path which, in this hypothetical scenario, has already been given up).
    "With seven national titles and 20 Final Fours in the 64-team NCAA Tournament era, Duke and UNC have had more playoff success than any other CONFERENCE." - Al Featherston

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Southern Pines, NC
    Quote Originally Posted by Jderf View Post
    I don't think "sliding over," in itself, is necessarily the problem. If a guard gets past his man on the perimeter, it makes sense for another defender to rotate in order to defend the path to the basket, sometimes taking a charge when the driver is out of control. I think everyone would agree that this is well within the game of basketball.

    Instead, I think the problem people are trying to key in on is not sliding over, but sliding under: when the defender jumps into the path of the driver after he has already committed to a scoring move, specifically to take a charge, rather than trying to defend the path to the basket (a path which, in this hypothetical scenario, has already been given up).
    And what about Syracuse? They always play a zone defense, so is calling charges against them ruled out? That would be the end of the zone defense, wouldn't it? Well, I stand by the idea that a defender, any defender, has the right to his spot. The real problem is in the way that the refs call the plays. Fix that, and the problem goes away.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Durham, NC
    Quote Originally Posted by Jarhead View Post
    And what about Syracuse? They always play a zone defense, so is calling charges against them ruled out? That would be the end of the zone defense, wouldn't it? Well, I stand by the idea that a defender, any defender, has the right to his spot.
    Right. I totally agree, actually. If the defender rotates into position at the start of (or during) the drive, he has the right to hold his ground and should do so. When this is done fluidly and consistently through effective rotations, I think it is what many on this board would call "beautiful defense." That is the way it should be played.

    However, what people here are reacting against is a superficially similar play, but one which is less aligned with basketball fundamentals, and also which is much more dangerous. That play is when the perimeter guard beats his defender and makes a move towards the open basket and the defender does not rotate over in time. Instead, the defender makes a late move to slide into the path of the basket, after the driver has already committed to a scoring move. When the defender does this, it is often with their hands by their sides or locked in front of them, not trying to make a play on the ball, but rather trying to draw a charge call by making the play look similar to the legitimate play in the paragraph above. This play, as I said, is much more dangerous to the players, and it arises not from trying to play good defense, but instead from trying to take advantage of ambiguous rules. In that kind of situation, it is the rules that are the cause of the problem.

    Now, I'm not sure what rule changes could be made to differentiate better between those two similar, yet fundamentally different plays -- but I definitely agree with others here that such rule changes should be proposed, discussed, and eventually implemented. Part of the problem, in my opinion, is that the two plays are just so hard to tell apart without a heavy dose of replay watching, so I think any rule changes should target that central issue. How to do that? That's the question.
    "With seven national titles and 20 Final Fours in the 64-team NCAA Tournament era, Duke and UNC have had more playoff success than any other CONFERENCE." - Al Featherston

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Southern Pines, NC
    Quote Originally Posted by Jderf View Post
    Right. I totally agree, actually. If the defender rotates into position at the start of (or during) the drive, he has the right to hold his ground and should do so. When this is done fluidly and consistently through effective rotations, I think it is what many on this board would call "beautiful defense." That is the way it should be played.

    However, what people here are reacting against is a superficially similar play, but one which is less aligned with basketball fundamentals, and also which is much more dangerous. That play is when the perimeter guard beats his defender and makes a move towards the open basket and the defender does not rotate over in time. Instead, the defender makes a late move to slide into the path of the basket, after the driver has already committed to a scoring move. When the defender does this, it is often with their hands by their sides or locked in front of them, not trying to make a play on the ball, but rather trying to draw a charge call by making the play look similar to the legitimate play in the paragraph above. This play, as I said, is much more dangerous to the players, and it arises not from trying to play good defense, but instead from trying to take advantage of ambiguous rules. In that kind of situation, it is the rules that are the cause of the problem.

    Now, I'm not sure what rule changes could be made to differentiate better between those two similar, yet fundamentally different plays -- but I definitely agree with others here that such rule changes should be proposed, discussed, and eventually implemented. Part of the problem, in my opinion, is that the two plays are just so hard to tell apart without a heavy dose of replay watching, so I think any rule changes should target that central issue. How to do that? That's the question.
    We are pretty much in agreement, but I take issue with the defender not making a play on the ball. The only question should be whether the defender was in position before the offensive player moves into him. He does not need to make a play on the ball. He needs only to stay firm in his position, and the ref needs to make the correct call.

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Durham, NC
    Quote Originally Posted by Jarhead View Post
    We are pretty much in agreement, but I take issue with the defender not making a play on the ball. The only question should be whether the defender was in position before the offensive player moves into him. He does not need to make a play on the ball. He needs only to stay firm in his position, and the ref needs to make the correct call.
    You're probably right about the "play on the ball" language, as there is nothing special about defending the ball itself (besides, you know, the whole putting-it-in-the-hoop thing). Defending the offensive player's body or path to the rim is just as legitimate. A better wording might have been "making a defensive play" vs. "making a late, dangerous, charge-motivated play." But yes, I do believe we are in agreement.
    "With seven national titles and 20 Final Fours in the 64-team NCAA Tournament era, Duke and UNC have had more playoff success than any other CONFERENCE." - Al Featherston

  11. #31
    Drawing a proper charge in a one-on-one man-to-man defensive situation, as the rules are written, is really, really hard. Drawing it in help defense, or out of a zone is a bit easier but is still very difficult.

    One on one, man to man requires the defender, who is always reacting to the movement of the man he is covering, to react, anticipate where the offensive player is heading and establish the position so that the offensive player can be expected to stop his momentum and/or change direction. When it is reasonable that the offensive player can adjust his direction/stop/pull up and he doesn't do so and still barrels forward; THAT is a charge. (Someone used the analogy of roughing the passer vs. hitting the quarterback just after he throws, perfect analogy) To do that as a defensive player just isn't that easy.

    The charge has been watered down in the last 20 years and has become a play that is seemingly called every time a defensive player can get in front of an offensive player, regardless of how late, and fall down and slide on his rear end.

    Drawing a charge in help defense is a bit easier, but it still requires the defender to anticipate a position and establish it so the offensive player can be expected to alter his path or stop. When help defense slides in at the last second under a player that has already begun the task of leaping towards the rim, there is NO possible way a charge should be called. Some of the most egregious charge calls are the sliding in under a driving player who has a path and has begun to leave the ground in order to take contact and fall down. These just aren't charges. At that point, defense is played vertically (think Bill Russell moving with the driving player, meeting him at the highest point and blocking the shot.)

    Whenever you watch a block/charge play you have to ask yourself, it is reasonable to assume the offensive player could have changed direction/stopped from when the defender "established" position. If not, its a block. Not a charge.
    Last edited by Spret42; 05-22-2012 at 01:25 PM.

  12. #32
    oops double post

  13. #33
    Quote Originally Posted by Spret42 View Post
    Drawing a proper charge in a one-on-one man-to-man defensive situation, as the rules are written, is really, really hard. Drawing it in help defense, or out of a zone is a bit easier but is still very difficult.

    One on one, man to man requires the defender, who is always reacting to the movement of the man he is covering, to react, anticipate where the offensive player is heading and establish the position so that the offensive player can be expected to stop his momentum and/or change direction. When it is reasonable that the offensive player can adjust his direction/stop/pull up and he doesn't do so and still barrels forward; THAT is a charge. (Someone used the analogy of roughing the passer vs. hitting the quarterback just after he throws, perfect analogy) To do that as a defensive player just isn't that easy.

    The charge has been watered down in the last 20 years and has become a play that is seemingly called every time a defensive player can get in front of an offensive player, regardless of how late, and fall down and slide on his rear end.

    Drawing a charge in help defense is a bit easier, but it still requires the defender to anticipate a position and establish it so the offensive player can be expected to alter his path or stop. When help defense slides in at the last second under a player that has already begun the task of leaping towards the rim, there is NO possible way a charge should be called. Some of the most egregious charge calls are the sliding in under a driving player who has a path and has begun to leave the ground in order to take contact and fall down. These just aren't charges. At that point, defense is played vertically (think Bill Russell moving with the driving player, meeting him at the highest point and blocking the shot.)

    Whenever you watch a block/charge play you have to ask yourself, it is reasonable to assume the offensive player could have changed direction/stopped from when the defender "established" position. If not, its a block. Not a charge.
    I disagree. Your definition gives a huge advantage to leapers who take off from further out. I don't think defenders in the lane have to step out of the way just because an offensive player takes off from the foul line. If a player jumps toward the goal with defenders between him and the basket, even if they are not perfectly set when he leaves the floor, he is playing out of control and a charge should be called. It's the ball handlers responsibility to keep his head up and dribble around the defender. Also I don't think you get a free pass through the lane just because you beat your man out on the perimeter. If the help comes you have to find the open man. Too many offensive players don't see the court because they just put their head down and go as soon as they see daylight. When the help comes you have to pull up or change directions to find the open man. You have to play under control. You could also say it's not fair for an offense player to jump into the defender after getting them in the air with a shot fake but the defender is "out of control" at that point so it's a foul.

  14. #34
    Quote Originally Posted by lotusland View Post
    I disagree. Your definition gives a huge advantage to leapers who take off from further out. I don't think defenders in the lane have to step out of the way just because an offensive player takes off from the foul line. If a player jumps toward the goal with defenders between him and the basket, even if they are not perfectly set when he leaves the floor, he is playing out of control and a charge should be called. It's the ball handlers responsibility to keep his head up and dribble around the defender. Also I don't think you get a free pass through the lane just because you beat your man out on the perimeter. If the help comes you have to find the open man. Too many offensive players don't see the court because they just put their head down and go as soon as they see daylight. When the help comes you have to pull up or change directions to find the open man. You have to play under control. You could also say it's not fair for an offense player to jump into the defender after getting them in the air with a shot fake but the defender is "out of control" at that point so it's a foul.
    A great leaper having an advantage in basketball? Blasphemy!!!

    I would never think a defender would have to step out of the way for a player taking off from the foul line. They would have a tremendous amount of options, time their own leap to guard the rim, in order to force a pass or block the shot, or which mostly likely not be a dunk, dunking from the foul line in a game is a pretty rare occurrence. If the defender can anticipate a great leaper taking off from far out and establish the position before the great leaper commits to his leaving the ground, regardless of from where on the floor it occurs, you have a charge. The point is the defender must anticipate and establish the position, forcing the offensive player to adjust.

    You said "Too many offensive players don't see the court because they just put their head down and go as soon as they see daylight." I agree, and if a defender can get to a position to penalize that, you have a charge.

    The question of block/charge centeres around whether the offensive player could reasonably be assumed to adjust to the positioning of the defensive player regardless of whether his head is up or not. An offensive player having his head down doesn't mean a defender can jump into a position late and recklessly in order to draw a charge. If the offensive players head is down and the defender is in a good position where the referee can penalize the offensive player for not having his head up and reading the defense, you have a legitimate charge call. The onus is still on the defender to get in a position so that the referee can penalize the offensive player for having his head down.
    Last edited by Spret42; 05-22-2012 at 02:34 PM.

  15. #35
    Quote Originally Posted by lotusland View Post
    If a player jumps toward the goal with defenders between him and the basket, even if they are not perfectly set when he leaves the floor, he is playing out of control and a charge should be called.
    I never said anything about being "perfectly set" I said "establish a position." If a defensive player has established a position (the phrase "perfectly set" needs to be jettisoned) before the offensive player commits to leaving the ground then a charge can be called.

    I am talking about defenders moving into a position between an offensive player and the basket after a player has committed to leaving the ground. If you want to deny the advantage of being a great leaper and being able to take off from further out by making it OK for any defender to step in underneath that player go ahead, but I am not sure many folks are going to want to watch that version of the game.

  16. #36
    Quote Originally Posted by Spret42 View Post
    I never said anything about being "perfectly set" I said "establish a position." If a defensive player has established a position (the phrase "perfectly set" needs to be jettisoned) before the offensive player commits to leaving the ground then a charge can be called.

    I am talking about defenders moving into a position between an offensive player and the basket after a player has committed to leaving the ground. If you want to deny the advantage of being a great leaper and being able to take off from further out by making it OK for any defender to step in underneath that player go ahead, but I am not sure many folks are going to want to watch that version of the game.
    I've seen basketball played where defenders pretty much get out of the way when an offensive player comes through the lane. I call it the NBA regular season. Plenty of people like that brand of basketball better but I don't. Besides we have the NBA so why make college the same? I said before I would prefer a no call in many of these situations. If you jump in the lane with defenders between you and the basket and it's not a clear block or a clear charge let it go but if the defender gets to the spot first I don't see why it should be treated differently whether the offensive player is dribbling or flying through the air. I don't remember Kyrie getting called for many charge fouls because he could change speed and change direction in traffic, find open cutters and go up strong with both hands. I know it's exciting to see someone get posterized but I prefer to watch a talented ball handler who plays under control.

  17. #37
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Southern Pines, NC
    Quote Originally Posted by Spret42 View Post
    Drawing a proper charge in a one-on-one man-to-man defensive situation, as the rules are written, is really, really hard. Drawing it in help defense, or out of a zone is a bit easier but is still very difficult.

    One on one, man to man requires the defender, who is always reacting to the movement of the man he is covering, to react, anticipate where the offensive player is heading and establish the position so that the offensive player can be expected to stop his momentum and/or change direction. When it is reasonable that the offensive player can adjust his direction/stop/pull up and he doesn't do so and still barrels forward; THAT is a charge. (Someone used the analogy of roughing the passer vs. hitting the quarterback just after he throws, perfect analogy) To do that as a defensive player just isn't that easy.

    The charge has been watered down in the last 20 years and has become a play that is seemingly called every time a defensive player can get in front of an offensive player, regardless of how late, and fall down and slide on his rear end.

    Drawing a charge in help defense is a bit easier, but it still requires the defender to anticipate a position and establish it so the offensive player can be expected to alter his path or stop. When help defense slides in at the last second under a player that has already begun the task of leaping towards the rim, there is NO possible way a charge should be called. Some of the most egregious charge calls are the sliding in under a driving player who has a path and has begun to leave the ground in order to take contact and fall down. These just aren't charges. At that point, defense is played vertically (think Bill Russell moving with the driving player, meeting him at the highest point and blocking the shot.)

    Whenever you watch a block/charge play you have to ask yourself, it is reasonable to assume the offensive player could have changed direction/stopped from when the defender "established" position. If not, its a block. Not a charge.
    Okay, yes, it's difficult for a defender to take a legal charge, slightly more so in a help defense. It is also difficult for a shooter to avoid contacting a defender that suddenly takes a legal position on the path he has chosen. In both cases, isn't that part of the required skill set for players? An offensive player running into defenders is often referred to as playing out of control, and a defensive player who can't stand his ground is called a flopper. As for Bill Russell, he also committed his share of fouls in those shot blocking plays, but his skill set was more often a factor in avoiding the foul.

    When it comes to how long a defender must be in his defensive position before an offensive player gets to him no rule comes to mind. How much time is needed to allow the guy with the ball to avoid contact when confronted with a well set defender? This is the most difficult part in this whole issue. How do we do this? Should we have the defender shout out, "Ringolevio, 123, 123, 123," in quick succession. That's less than 2 seconds, but even Kyrie Irving could not avoid the collision in that amount of time. Not a chance for a rule like that. The best way to handle it is to develop the necessary skills in the referees to make the correct call, and in the players to avoid bringing on the call.

    I just noticed the post just before this in which lotusland brings up Kyrie. He's the only guy I've ever seen that is the master of avoiding the charge, but the rules should not be changed to allow others not as good as Kyrie to avoid it. Let hem watch Kyrie videos over and over to learn how to do it.
    Last edited by Jarhead; 05-22-2012 at 04:58 PM.

  18. #38

    rule clarification

    FYI - NCAA Playing Rules Oversight Panel attempts to clarify block-charge. Panel believes too many charges are being called, giving defense improper advantage. Read it yourself.

    http://espn.go.com/blog/collegebaske...rge-definition

    Eamonn Brennan, whose ESPN blog today excerpts the Panel's report, confidently asserts: "Every college hoops fan in the country is currently nodding in agreement." Maybe over-confidently, as Brennan apparently has not followed this thread.

Similar Threads

  1. Block vs Charge. You make the call.
    By magjayran in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 01-26-2012, 10:15 PM
  2. Better Title Game Block
    By HCheek37 in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 10-09-2010, 08:55 AM
  3. How the new block/charge rule is affecting Duke's defense
    By feldspar in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 12-04-2009, 11:18 PM
  4. DBR Block Party
    By ForeverBlowingBubbles in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 03-12-2008, 01:34 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •