Did they add this rule to college bball this year? I hate it. It's just a rule that makes it illegal to play defense. Plus, it leads to annoying appeals to officials after charges that the defender was inside the restricted zone (happened at least twice in the MU-UW-Madison game).
I know Bilas constantly advocated for it being applied to the college game but I can't for the life of me figure out why. If I wanted to watch ole defense I could have always turned on an NBA game.
The rule was instituted, in college, last year without the arc. This year they added the arc. I think it is great. I was far too tired of seeing Duke players stand under the basket and flop for fouls, that is not playing good defense.
Is it just me or is the college circle significantly smaller than the NBA circle? At the game it seemed like you almost had to be standing under the hoop to be within the circle.
Quote from: TallTitan34 on December 05, 2011, 12:30:32 PM
Is it just me or is the college circle significantly smaller than the NBA circle? At the game it seemed like you almost had to be standing under the hoop to be within the circle.
It is smaller and intentionally so.
Quote from: lawwarrior12 on December 05, 2011, 12:21:30 PM
Did they add this rule to college bball this year? I hate it. It's just a rule that makes it illegal to play defense. Plus, it leads to annoying appeals to officials after charges that the defender was inside the restricted zone (happened at least twice in the MU-UW-Madison game).
True, it happened twice, but in both of those situations it did not affect or slow down the game at all. Those players would have complained about those calls with or without the circle. The beauty of the circle is that it was immediately apparent that they were both wrong.
Quote from: StillAWarrior on December 05, 2011, 12:35:56 PM
True, it happened twice, but in both of those situations it did not affect or slow down the game at all. Those players would have complained about those calls with or without the circle. The beauty of the circle is that it was immediately apparent that they were both wrong.
IF the circle were bigger, I think our players would have had their heels on the line.
So what is the rule? The refs CAN'T call a charge in that area or they have the ability not to call one that area. I completely agree that standing under the rim is not good defense but if a player is just lowering the shoulder and bombing into the lane, a ref should have the ability to call it.
For me the circle is a welcome addition. The officials have enough trouble making calls on charge vs block.....see Vander versus Carrot Top. This removes one of the trickiest parts of making that call. Why would that not be a good thing?
Quote from: ErickJD08 on December 05, 2011, 12:41:12 PM
IF the circle were bigger, I think our players would have had their heels on the line.
So what is the rule? The refs CAN'T call a charge in that area or they have the ability not to call one that area. I completely agree that standing under the rim is not good defense but if a player is just lowering the shoulder and bombing into the lane, a ref should have the ability to call it.
All the circle says is if the defensive player is on or in it, it is DEFINITELY a blocking call. Basically unless you are going up for a block you won't get a charge call from inside the circle
@ ErickJD08 I'm not 100% sure what the precise rule is. I hope there is some discretion for the officials to prevent that.
@ DenverMU I don't like flopping either, but I also don't like the idea of having to bail out of good position to avoid a blocking foul that would otherwise be a charge because your heels are a few inches too close to the rim.
Quote from: lawwarrior12 on December 05, 2011, 12:43:48 PM
@ ErickJD08 I'm not 100% sure what the precise rule is. I hope there is some discretion for the officials to prevent that.
@ DenverMU I don't like flopping either, but I also don't like the idea of having to bail out of good position to avoid a blocking foul that would otherwise be a charge because your heels are a few inches too close to the rim.
If you are too close to the rim it isn't good position by definition. Half of this is player safety, discouraging players from sliding under a player going up to the rim trying to draw a charge.
Quote from: lawwarrior12 on December 05, 2011, 12:21:30 PM
Did they add this rule to college bball this year? I hate it. It's just a rule that makes it illegal to play defense. Plus, it leads to annoying appeals to officials after charges that the defender was inside the restricted zone (happened at least twice in the MU-UW-Madison game).
I know Bilas constantly advocated for it being applied to the college game but I can't for the life of me figure out why. If I wanted to watch ole defense I could have always turned on an NBA game.
I may be wrong, but I thought the rule was instituted before last year, but the arc was invisible until this year.
Nevertheless, the rule doesn't make it "illegal" to play defense. If you take what would otherwise be a charge if not for the fact you are standing in the arc, you're not called for blocking... it's simply no call. Personally, I agree with the rule, you shouldn't be able to take a charge underneath the hoop.
In any event, I thoroughly enjoyed the way that two Badgers called for charging on Saturday got up and immediately pointed to the arc; however, replays showed inconclusively that the defender was at least a step or two outside of it. Apparently, the UW has it's own proprietary method for drawing a charge arc on its practice floor... too bad for them the NCAA doesn't allow the UW method on the KC floor.
I feel like I remember this rule being instituted in the NBA back when the NBA games weren't high enough scoring precisely to encourage ole defense and big dunks. Standing in for a charge shouldn't be punished.
Quote from: lawwarrior12 on December 05, 2011, 12:52:34 PM
I feel like I remember this rule being instituted in the NBA back when the NBA games weren't high enough scoring precisely to encourage ole defense and big dunks. Standing in for a charge shouldn't be punished.
You're right but I think that NBA circle is much larger. I'm willing to bet that the circle will eliminate way more confusion than it will limit defenses. As an example, while there was complaining and pointing, in the game on Saturday we didn't see one call or no call that involved someone inside the circle and MU goes to the rim a lot.
At college bball hasn't adopted defensive 3 second calls and no-traveling-if-your-drive-ends-in-a-dunk rules.
The college circle is smaller, but so is the lane itself. The circle looks right sized to me.
As for the circle itself, I am glad the added it. I complained last year that it was far too subjective. Each official had their own interpretation as to the zone/size.
And yes, if you take a charge inside the circle, it is a blocking foul. Last year, we have a few blocking fouls called on us, where we were perfectly still. People yelled at the call. Many did not understand the rule change. The circle should make more consistency and also help fans understand the rule.
My understanding of the rule is that help/secondary defenders can't draw a charge there.
For example, if Otule is defending someone posting up and drops a foot into the circle, he can still draw a charge. But if Crowder steps through the lane to double that guy/defend him if he goes around Otule, he can't draw a charge.
Quote from: MUMac on December 05, 2011, 04:14:44 PM
The college circle is smaller, but so is the lane itself. The circle looks right sized to me.
As for the circle itself, I am glad the added it. I complained last year that it was far too subjective. Each official had their own interpretation as to the zone/size.
And yes, if you take a charge inside the circle, it is a blocking foul. Last year, we have a few blocking fouls called on us, where we were perfectly still. People yelled at the call. Many did not understand the rule change. The circle should make more consistency and also help fans understand the rule.
You're right... after looking at the rules, it does state that if there is illegal contact within the arc, a blocking foul should be called as a secondary defender cannot legally establish position inside the arc.
However, blocking must involve contact which "impedes the progress of an opponent" whereas there just has to be contact for charging to be called. The real problem is this double-standard on what constitutes charging/blocking that still exists, so while controversial block/charge calls & no-calls aren't going to go away, this should go a long way towards eliminating some of the ambiguity.
i think a natural part of the game has been lost with this rule. two years ago they announced that there was a no-charge zone, but it wasn't painted on the floor. despite this, last year referees still were calling charges close to the basket. this fact should tell you all you need to know about it.
the idea of "secondary defenders" is vague in practice, because you could be playing zone defense and which defenders are "secondary defenders" are constantly changing as the offense moves around as defenders pick up different players since they are playing a zone.
anyone should be able to draw a charge anywhere on the court at any time. it's always been a part of the game to keep offenses honest, and now offenses can just run you over and you can't even stand your ground. it makes no sense. the NBA did a zone a while back because scoring went down when they allowed zone defense. college hoops has always allowed zone defense so adding the restricted zone just tilts the playing field in favor of the offense.
there's people out there who like the restricted zone, but i don't think it makes it any easier for the refs, but rather makes it harder. As lawwarrior12 said, "Standing in for a charge shouldn't be punished". Taking charges would also seem to be less dangerous than being forced to go up for a block and a mid-air collision. it also effects defensive strategy. you take away the confidence level defenders have in setting charges. so in general, you'll have less players standing their ground and more players running around in circles going for blocks. yeah dunks and blocks are exciting, but sometimes the smarter play is to set the charge, and to be confident while setting it. worrying about an arc as you get closer to the basket lowers that confidence level and tilts the game in favor of the offense. scoring goes up and basketball fundamentals go down, just like the NBA.
we love college hoops because it's a more natural game than the NBA, and painting the arc on the floor creates an artificial aspect of the game that never existed prior to it. while it may look like just a small thing, defenses have to worry about it, it changes their decision-making (if it hasn't already it will over time) and will lead to more and-1s. the charge / block has always been a subjective call, but there was an art to it. it had to do with whether the defender was moving when there was contact. and of course the referee always had the ability to not call a foul either way if he was unsure.
i enjoy seeing defenses take charges. it was one of the finer things in life. they've taken away the referee's ability to make this call naturally, and it created all sorts of problems. very few teams really are good at drawing chargers, and they kind of took away the advantage that those teams had. with the no-charge zone, teams won't be forced to hit the mid-range jumper anymore when they can just drive to the lane knowing they can't be called for a foul. a fundamental part of the game has been lost forever and very few seem to notice or care. that's the way it goes i guess.
Quote from: mu03eng on December 05, 2011, 12:43:38 PM
All the circle says is if the defensive player is on or in it, it is DEFINITELY a blocking call. Basically unless you are going up for a block you won't get a charge call from inside the circle
Two trends will result from this : there will be less overall charging attempts AND there will be more blocking attempts. When you go up for a block you risk getting called for a foul. In the NBA, this has resulted in the options being a block or a no call. (usually a foul since the defender is moving) In the NBA, for a while there was rarely no-calls and it became just defensive foul after defensive foul. (especially late in the game) This is what now has the possibility to happen in college basketball which is very different from before. This might increase the offensive/defensive foul ratio, and since it's rare to see an offensive foul called on a block attempt (since the defender is moving / jumping), that's going to lead to more free throws. Maybe not right away but over time.
For defenses, the decision-making change occurs when an offensive player is cutting towards the basket, the defense might be in a zone and the defensive players have a split second to decide what to do. part of it was cutting off the line to the basket. How do you do that? Before, there were situations where more than one player reacted at a time that multiple players may try to pick a spot on the floor near the basket to stand to force the player to pass out. (maybe there's an open teammate or something) with the no-charge zone it makes it harder on defenses to stop situations like that. with a no charge zone, there's less space for defenses to defend. i don't think the vote to implement the no charge zone was unanimous. i think it was like 2/3 to 1/3. you can hardly find out any information on the voting. the whole way they implemented this zone is astounding, first with the announcement of a no-charge zone without the arc, then two years later the actual arc. this whole no-charging movement really has been going since immediately following the 2008-09 season. the reasoning behind it is full of holes. the whole idea that the charge / block had to be redefined is puzzling at best. i think it's wild that they made defensive players standing "a problem" that needed to be corrected. was charging really a "problem"? wasn't it a skill to take a shot without collide into a standing defender? I'm pretty sure the refs knew how to call blocks or charges. Yes there were some inconsistencies between refs in how they make the call, but most of the calls were correct throughout this whole saga. they must have seen something in the 2008-09 that made them think that charging was a problem and it needed to be fixed like the NBA. I don't know why they would even think about it like that.