NCAA clarifies block/charge

[Da Coach]

Reportedly the NCAA is concerned about an increase in charging fouls last season. It is suspected by some that it may have something to do with the new semi-circle under the basket and that officials are so focused on it that they reward defenders more now with a charge call as long as they are outside the restricted area.

For whatever reason, it has been a problem for a long time. This recent increase in charging fouls has prompted the NCAA to issue some clarifications to officials on how to make the block/charge call. See the next-to-last section titled "Men’s Officiating Guidance

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

The men’s committee reviewed blocking and charging plays and the impact of the three-foot restricted area arc. The committee believes that in some cases the call is not being made correctly, sometimes giving the defense an advantage.

To help address this, the committee approved guidelines to help better administer these rules:

• 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.

The committee plans a more thorough review of several other areas during the next year and will continue to develop better guidance for officials as needed.



Interesting.....why does the NCAA feel the need to remind officials of what they should already know and be doing?

A lot of basketball people are concerned that there are way too many charging fouls called, and it's impact on the game, i.e longer games, more delays, lower scores, etc.
Here are thoughts from one college basketball writer at ESPN-

http://espn.go.com/blog/collegebasketballnation/post/_/id/59221/change-the-game-rethinking-block-charge

[tornado]

??? 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. ...

so, the next step is to halt the games and review video each time to be sure these requirements are fulfilled???

[saluki762]

Interesting.....why does the NCAA feel the need to remind officials of what they should already know and be doing?

Shouldn't every job have some sort of continuing education?

[Da Coach]

Shouldn't every job have some sort of continuing education?

Sure, but in my profession and in most, continuing education consists of teaching new and updated facts and developments...not repeating the same basic stuff everyone already should know.

[it's boogie time]

I hate the amount of charges that are called in college basketball. However, I wish Bradley tried to take more charges. It's usually rewarded. Any type of shot block attempt is normally called a foul.

[saluki762]

Sure, but in my profession and in most, continuing education consists of teaching new and updated facts and developments...not repeating the same basic stuff everyone already should know.

This is very true but the NCAA is the one that changed the rule by adding the circle under the basket. Some clarification and reinforcement was probably necessary and overdue.

If I change a small part of the software that my employees used at the office, i always trained on the new portion and reaffirmed that nothing else should change. Seems that the NCAA may have forgotten that last part.

[lefty]

No matter what, it is a bang bang judgement call....you can put all the circles on a court and change all the definitions you want...there will always be some controversial charge/block calls

[Da Coach]

This is very true but the NCAA is the one that changed the rule by adding the circle under the basket. Some clarification and reinforcement was probably necessary and overdue.

If I change a small part of the software that my employees used at the office, i always trained on the new portion and reaffirmed that nothing else should change. Seems that the NCAA may have forgotten that last part.

This is true, and I agree with what you are saying.
But here again are the points of emphasis stated in the NCAA release-
??? 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.

Those points do not appear to relate to the rule change or the arc. They all appear to be simple restatements of longstanding rules. The last line even point out that officials appear to be somehow allowing the new rule to affect their calls elsewhere. I am just trying to understand why?

[wily coyote]

This is true, and I agree with what you are saying.
But here again are the points of emphasis stated in the NCAA release-
??? 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.

Those points do not appear to relate to the rule change or the arc. They all appear to be simple restatements of longstanding rules. The last line even point out that officials appear to be somehow allowing the new rule to affect their calls elsewhere. I am just trying to understand why?

The rules committee were probably at a nice golfing resort on the NCAA dime and had to come up with something. Like DC stated, this is not a change it is a restatement of longstanding rules. I've been retired for 20 years and this is the same interpertation as it was 20 year ago. The only difference of course is the useless arc.