The charge calls

[zach]

Calling Brent Blum...

I would like to know your thoughts on the officiating yesterday as your insight is always welcomed on the board. I thought it was a brutal game to watch, regardless of fan base. I just assume the Refs got to open a present early before Christmas and wanted to try out their brand new whistles. Watching the stream, it appeared at times the ref behind the action"worst angle" would make the call...i.e. charging vs flop. I couldn't tell if it was Drake or Duke playing for the flops. I thought they were too active with the whistle both ways.

Anyway, your thoughts would be great.

Z

 

[Dryburn]

Calling Brent Blum...

I would like to know your thoughts on the officiating yesterday as your insight is always welcomed on the board. I thought it was a brutal game to watch, regardless of fan base. I just assume the Refs got to open a present early before Christmas and wanted to try out their brand new whistles. Watching the stream, it appeared at times the ref behind the action"worst angle" would make the call...i.e. charging vs flop. I couldn't tell if it was Drake or Duke playing for the flops. I thought they were too active with the whistle both ways.

Anyway, your thoughts would be great.

Z

It would be good to hear his thoughts after tha game, although he pretty much made his feelings known on Twitter yesterday.....even before the game started.

Brent Blum‏@brentblum Paul Janssen officiating Iowa State-Drake..not my fave.


Brent Blum‏@brentblum
A foul fest with Paul Janssen's crew...like riding a bike

 

[TurbulentEddie]

Officiating wasn't overly against ISU, but Niang's "charge" was the worst call of the game by a mile.

He just completely schooled two Drake defenders, neither were set, the main contact was inside the area, Drake player falls down because he got killed. 3 point play turned into a charge. I don't know how players keep their cool when that happens, I'm sure I'd have went off.

Did anyone else watching the video feed notice Niang mouthing "that's bulls***" over and over after that call? Surprised he didn't get T'd up.

 

[IcSyU]

Calling Brent Blum...

I would like to know your thoughts on the officiating yesterday as your insight is always welcomed on the board. I thought it was a brutal game to watch, regardless of fan base. I just assume the Refs got to open a present early before Christmas and wanted to try out their brand new whistles. Watching the stream, it appeared at times the ref behind the action"worst angle" would make the call...i.e. charging vs flop. I couldn't tell if it was Drake or Duke playing for the flops. I thought they were too active with the whistle both ways.

Anyway, your thoughts would be great.

Z

In college basketball, the trail official has the call if the start of the player's move was in his zone. For example, if McGee takes a pass from Lucious on the wing and drives baseline, the referee who should've moved to between the free throw line extended and top of the key (with respect to being perpendicular to the sideline) should have the call, not the guy under the hoop.

 

[kentkel]

If someone could cite the rulebook where someone has to be "set" to draw an offensive foul that'd be great.

You can pick out people who don't understand basketball pretty quickly with 2 big things:
a) There is no such thing as "over the back."
b) There is no requirement that you have to be "set" to draw a charge.

The first charge on Percy was an offensive foul. It should be called more when the shoulder is used to clear space. The second was solid acting. A couple were legitimate, a couple were bang-bang, and a couple were just terrible calls.

I will agree with your points that you numbered, but I take a little issue with the claim that people who complain about "over the back" don't understand basketball. I have been coaching for 20 years and still use the term - not as a complaint to the refs. I use it because it has been a designated term that all fan bases and players seem to use to explain the act of the opposing player's illegal pushing, shoving, extracurricular activity to get the ball. I explain to my team what I mean by "over the back," but it seems that it is part of the terminology that has permeated the basketball culture. Again, I agree with you that there is NO over-the-back per se, but it doesn't mean that the people using the term don't understand the game.

 

[Ficklone02]

If someone could cite the rulebook where someone has to be "set" to draw an offensive foul that'd be great.

You can pick out people who don't understand basketball pretty quickly with 2 big things:
a) There is no such thing as "over the back."
b) There is no requirement that you have to be "set" to draw a charge.

The first charge on Percy was an offensive foul. It should be called more when the shoulder is used to clear space. The second was solid acting. A couple were legitimate, a couple were bang-bang, and a couple were just terrible calls.

Again, that's completely ludicris to say someone doesn't understand basketball because they don't use the rulebook terminology when describing a foul. "Over the back" is a common term that describes the action of the foul being committed. Everyone knows what that means because its been ingraned in everybodies minds as being called that by announcers. So, why would anyone want to use the rulebook terminology to describe something when everyone understands what "over the back" means. To use that would just require more explanation. Get over it buddy.

 

[andymhallman]

I didn't get to watch the game so I can't comment on the officiating in general. But in regards to your comment, this absolutely does not matter. The myth that a defender has to be perfectly set to draw a charge has been put forth by TV commentators who have never read a rule book. There is nothing -- repeat: nothing -- in the rule book that says a defender has to be set to draw a charge. As long as the defender is not moving toward the offensive player, torso-to-torso contact is a charge.

I agree with you, ruxCYtable, that moving one's feet does not preclude one from taking a charge. But the guidelines the NCAA published for referees in March 2012 included this section:

Before the offensive player (with the ball) becomes airborne, the defender must have two feet on the floor, be facing the opponent and be stationary to draw a charge. Otherwise it should be a blocking foul.

Secondary defenders (help defenders) moving forward or to the side are also in violation, and these should be blocking fouls.

Contact that is “through the chest” is not de facto proof of a charge. The rule in its entirety must be considered before determining a foul.

In some cases, it appears that a defender is being rewarded solely for being outside the arc, without considering the other aspects of the rules.

http://www.ncaa.com/news/basketball-men/article/2012-05-14/committees-address-court-surfacing

 

[andymhallman]

By the way, there is a silver lining to all the charge calls yesterday: Iowa State is driving to the basket. They have relied so much on the three in the early going I was afraid they wouldn't be able to score at all if they went cold from beyond the arc. It's nice to know they can score inside even when they're not hot from outside.

 

[IcSyU]

Again, that's completely ludicris to say someone doesn't understand basketball because they don't use the rulebook terminology when describing a foul. "Over the back" is a common term that describes the action of the foul being committed. Everyone knows what that means because its been ingraned in everybodies minds as being called that by announcers. So, why would anyone want to use the rulebook terminology to describe something when everyone understands what "over the back" means. To use that would just require more explanation. Get over it buddy.

Like I said, nearly any time you hear the phrase "over the back" used, it is likely the person has no idea what is going on. I can potentially legally go over your back and get a rebound if I'm taller than you are. That's not a foul.

Most of the time when some idiot is yelling for over the back, they're looking for a push call from the referee. That requires exactly no explanation to anyone familiar with the English language.

Same with the guy who thinks that it can't be a charge if the recipient's feet are moving. As long as you've established initial legal guarding position, you're good to go so long as you stay in legal guarding position. That's one of my biggest pet peeves watching college basketball. Guy jumps on a pump fake, stays vertical, gets jumped into, gets whistled for a blocking foul. No referee with a brain in their head is calling a blocking foul there. A good ref is going to let play continue.

Same story with one of Percy's? fouls yesterday. He jumped straight up with his arms extended straight above his head after establishing legal guarding position and the guard jumped into him under the bucket. Percy gets called for the body foul. Absolute garbage.

 

[Nihawk]

Officiating wasn't overly against ISU, but Niang's "charge" was the worst call of the game by a mile.

He just completely schooled two Drake defenders, neither were set, the main contact was inside the area, Drake player falls down because he got killed. 3 point play turned into a charge. I don't know how players keep their cool when that happens, I'm sure I'd have went off.

The call happened right in front me and it was bad.

 

[Ficklone02]

Like I said, nearly any time you hear the phrase "over the back" used, it is likely the person has no idea what is going on. I can potentially legally go over your back and get a rebound if I'm taller than you are. That's not a foul.

Most of the time when some idiot is yelling for over the back, they're looking for a push call from the referee. That requires exactly no explanation to anyone familiar with the English language.

Same with the guy who thinks that it can't be a charge if the recipient's feet are moving. As long as you've established initial legal guarding position, you're good to go so long as you stay in legal guarding position. That's one of my biggest pet peeves watching college basketball. Guy jumps on a pump fake, stays vertical, gets jumped into, gets whistled for a blocking foul. No referee with a brain in their head is calling a blocking foul there. A good ref is going to let play continue.

Same story with one of Percy's? fouls yesterday. He jumped straight up with his arms extended straight above his head after establishing legal guarding position and the guard jumped into him under the bucket. Percy gets called for the body foul. Absolute garbage.

Like I said, over the back is a term everybody knows. Do you really think that if I'm calling for an over the back I'm doing so because I think that their guy jumped over our guy without touching him? Get real, I'm calling for it because I think he's fouling our guy while going up for the rebound. Oh, I guess I could amend it and instead say, "He's pushing our guy while going over his back". (how rediculous would that sound) Or, as you suggest I could call for "pushing". Here's how a conversation would go in the stands if I called for pushing.

Me: He's pushing!
Others: Pushing who?
Me: #25 is fouling/pushing our guy
Others: You mean he's fouling him while going up for the rebound?
Me: Yeah
Others: Why didn't you just say he went over the back? Everybody knows what means.

Seriously dude, its semantics. Nobody is an idiot, or doesn't understand the rules just because they use generally accepted terminology. You could say someone is an idiot because they consistently beg the officials for incorrect calls, but the use of the term "over the back" does not make them an idiot.

 

[CtownCyclone]

Like I said, over the back is a term everybody knows. Do you really think that if I'm calling for an over the back I'm doing so because I think that their guy jumped over our guy without touching him? Get real, I'm calling for it because I think he's fouling our guy while going up for the rebound. Oh, I guess I could amend it and instead say, "He's pushing our guy while going over his back". (how rediculous would that sound) Or, as you suggest I could call for "pushing". Here's how a conversation would go in the stands if I called for pushing.

Me: He's pushing!
Others: Pushing who?
Me: #25 is fouling/pushing our guy
Others: You mean he's fouling him while going up for the rebound?
Me: Yeah
Others: Why didn't you just say he went over the back? Everybody knows what means.

Seriously dude, its semantics. Nobody is an idiot, or doesn't understand the rules just because they use generally accepted terminology. You could say someone is an idiot because they consistently beg the officials for incorrect calls, but the use of the term "over the back" does not make them an idiot.

Shhhh, he's feeling self-important. Let him have this moment.

 

[brentblum]

Like many of you, I thought the numerous whistles made the game very frustrating to watch. It was clear Drake's strategy was to try and draw charging fouls anytime Iowa State's big men went to the rim. The charge call on Niang was flat out missed in my mind. Drake kept grabbing and holding on both ends, which makes life difficult on officials and if called closely can make for a miserable game to watch.

Other than the Niang charge and the foul on Percy when he appeared to have his hands vertical, I don't think there were many egregious whistles, but the over abundance of fouls and Drake's grabbing/falling strategy made it seem worse than usual.

 

[Billups06]

Shhhh, he's feeling self-important. Let him have this moment.

He is feeling self-important. And I would bet the majority of announcers use the term over the back.

I bet he'd also have a problem with announcers, especially in football, saying "player X left his feet to make the hit". Everyone knowing full well that you can't actually leave your feet, you leave the ground. Just the generally accepted terminology.

 

[IcSyU]

He is feeling self-important. And I would bet the majority of announcers use the term over the back.

I bet he'd also have a problem with announcers, especially in football, saying "player X left his feet to make the hit". Everyone knowing full well that you can't actually leave your feet, you leave the ground. Just the generally accepted terminology.

Start officiating. Tell me the combined IQ of those who yell "over the back" and report back please. It isn't high.

And if that's truly how a conversation with those around you in the stands would go, I pity you because you're surrounded by morons.

Instead of listening to people in a crowd, listen to the knowledgeable people...like the coaches? Ever heard Fred say "That's over the back!" Hell no he hasn't, nor do his twins when you officiate them.

I stand by my argument: The majority of people who call for an "over the back" foul are clueless. All of them? Absolutely not. Over the back was a call in middle school to protect the smaller kids when you're teaching fundamentals at lower levels.

 

[ISUAlum2002]

Give it up. You're probably the only one who thinks the "majority of people who call for an 'over the back' foul are clueless." Many of us understand the rules and that you can actually get a rebound while going over the top of someone. But in many of those cases, the guy who is going "over the back" to get the rebound is fouling the other player while he is in the process of doing so unless he is just vastly superior athletically and in terms of talent.

 

[Ficklone02]

Start officiating. Tell me the combined IQ of those who yell "over the back" and report back please. It isn't high.

And if that's truly how a conversation with those around you in the stands would go, I pity you because you're surrounded by morons.

Instead of listening to people in a crowd, listen to the knowledgeable people...like the coaches? Ever heard Fred say "That's over the back!" Hell no he hasn't, nor do his twins when you officiate them.

I stand by my argument: The majority of people who call for an "over the back" foul are clueless. All of them? Absolutely not. Over the back was a call in middle school to protect the smaller kids when you're teaching fundamentals at lower levels.

I'm guessing your IQ is pretty low if you can't make the connection that "over the back" is the best way to communicate to those around you what you thought of a play. There are 10 players on a court, and if I just yell "he's pushing" that could mean anybody on the court. But if I yell "over the back" that pretty well pinpoints the two players involved in the play I want to talk about. Its the most effecient way for me in the stands to convey what I think I just saw to the people around me. I know you're deep into your argument, so you can't retract now, but stop while your behind.

 

[ruxCYtable]

I agree with you, ruxCYtable, that moving one's feet does not preclude one from taking a charge. But the guidelines the NCAA published for referees in March 2012 included this section:



Committees address court surfacing - NCAA.com

I don't officiate college basketball, obviously, but I am absolutely shocked that uses the term stationary and I'd bet Brent Blum would be as well. I work a lot of high school basketball and attend a lot of camps with college officials and I can tell you that the word stationary has never been used. It goes against everything I have ever been taught about officiating a block/charge situation. I'm going to forward your post to a friend who is a D-1 official and get his thoughts and report back.

Although I think IcSyU is being a bit harsh by saying people who use the term "over and back" don't know basketball, I know where he is coming from and I'm sure Brent and every official on this board does. There are A LOT of people --mostly fans, but a surprising number of coaches -- who think there does not have to be contact for "over the back" to be called. Same with "moving screens." I've listened to fans and even coaches yell for moving screens all night long on plays where there was literally no contact whatsoever. My aforementioned friend who officiates D-1 even had a college coach try to tell him that there didn't have to be contact for an illegal screen to be called.

The vast majority of people get it. It's a small percentage who don't and make everyone look bad, as with many things in life.

Again, I didn't get to see yesterday's game and I'm kind of making a point this year to not defend officials because I am one but I will jump in and say something when I think there's a misunderstanding of rules. If nobody finds it useful I'll shut up and retreat to my bunker.

 

[ISUCubswin]

1. Something is wrong with 52 fouls in a 40 minute period. Basketball is supposed to be a fast paced game, and we did not see that yesterday. If I do my math correctly, there was a foul called about every 42 seconds in the game. Thats just over one "full" shot clock possession.

2. People don't go to games to watch the refs blow whistles. What we saw yesterday were refs that wanted people to know they were there.

3. Teams that go for the charge call every time they're on defense are a****ots. So the entire MVC? A****ots.

 

[ISUCubswin]

Also, did anyone else see the Drake fan on TV calling for an intentional foul on McGee when he tried getting a charge call near the end of the game? Hilarious.