A player in the air can't control where he lands. A defender shouldn't be allowed to slide into a player's landing space and draw the charge.

 

That's a block. But I agree it is sometimes called a charge.

The rule book does not allow a defender to slide in after the start of the shot.

 

Which is why I said that puts the problem with charge calls squarely on the officials making the call.

That's a block. But I agree it is sometimes called a charge.

 

I see it called a charge more often than not.

Which is why I said that puts the problem with charge calls squarely on the officials making the call.

 

Of course it does. The officials have to decide. That's not going to change.

Of course it does. The officials have to decide. That's not going to change.

 

But if we eliminate the charge call all together then it is easier on the officials to not screw it up.

But if we eliminate the charge call all together then it is easier on the officials to not screw it up.

 

We're going in circles here. You already agreed with previous examples of what an offensive player couldn't do. You can never remove the charge rule.

We're going in circles here. You already agreed with previous examples of what an offensive player couldn't do. You can never remove the charge rule.

 

Yeah you can. It'd be easy to do. In 2017 we still don't know if over the back foul still exists or if it is only a push off now. That one is called as inconsistently as the charge is called.

Yeah you can. It'd be easy to do. In 2017 we still don't know if over the back foul still exists or if it is only a push off now. That one is called as inconsistently as the charge is called.

Agree with you 1,000% on getting rid of the charge call. It is used too much by the officials. Players rely too much on getting bailed out then staying on their feet playing defense. Player A knows he can't guard player B. Player A's only option is to flop and hope to get bailed out and we have refs that are so bad they can't tell the difference.

I'm a big fan of the charge call. My sons went thru a program that prided themselves on positioning and getting set. Every year, there was one kid on the team that took around 1 per game. That's 2 points potentially off the board and another possession by your team.

 

Not sure is this call was mentioned already in the thread but I Watched a game the other night. Offensive guy was going hard to the basket and the defense was sliding with him. As the offensive player started his power move to the rim, his shoulder hit the defender. Whistle blown. I thought the defender didn't have position. The announcers that is was a charge. After the officials debated for a while, it was called a double foul causing both players to foul out of the game. It's part of the game, it's a very hard call for the officials to make. Just hope they are in position and make the best call they can.

We're going in circles here. You already agreed with previous examples of what an offensive player couldn't do. You can never remove the charge rule.

 

Remove the rule and the whole game changes to a power game controlled by size/strength with little room for the physically inferior athlete. Give the ball to old guys like James Lee on the move and no defender would have a chance.

Blarge...it's a cop out, plain and simple. With that said, it's not called all that often, at least I don't see it.

 

Just think if a baseball guy advocated for the "bike"...a ball and a strike called at the same time. You could simultaneously strike out and take first base on a full count call. That guy would be run out of town. No different here.

Blarge...it's a cop out, plain and simple. With that said, it's not called all that often, at least I don't see it.

 

Just think if a baseball guy advocated for the "bike"...a ball and a strike called at the same time. You could simultaneously strike out and take first base on a full count call. That guy would be run out of town. No different here.

 

Here's the problem with your analogy:

 

Your baseball example is the actual location of 1 object in a defined area, the strike zone.

 

The basketball example involves 2 people, typically in some form of movement, and the ball and a decision about when and where each of those 3 are at the decision point.

 

It's easy in baseball, it's a ball or a strike....not so much in basketball, mostly because of all the additional variables to consider at that moment of decision.

Here's the problem with your analogy:

 

Your baseball example is the actual location of 1 object in a defined area, the strike zone.

 

The basketball example involves 2 people, typically in some form of movement, and the ball and a decision about when and where each of those 3 are at the decision point.

 

It's easy in baseball, it's a ball or a strike....not so much in basketball, mostly because of all the additional variables to consider at that moment of decision.

 

While everything you say is 100% factual and I see what your point is, I still believe the analogy holds. How many times have you heard, of a ball and strike call "well that one was close and could have gone either way"...though technically it's either a strike or it isn't. And while umpire X might have called a specific pitch a strike, umpire Y may very well have called the same pitch a ball, point being it's a very subjective call as well, even though there are clear rules governing it. But it can't be both.

While everything you say is 100% factual and I see what your point is, I still believe the analogy holds. How many times have you heard, of a ball and strike call "well that one was close and could have gone either way"...though technically it's either a strike or it isn't. And while umpire X might have called a specific pitch a strike, umpire Y may very well have called the same pitch a ball, point being it's a very subjective call as well, even though there are clear rules governing it. But it can't be both.

 

Never ? :taz:

Never ? :taz:

 

Man I wish I could figure out where all my emoji characters disappeared to.