Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 29

Thread: Does any one else thing that "no charge zone" is stupid

  1. #1

    Default Re: Does any one else thing that "no charge zone" is stupid

    I think about this subject every single game. That'll be the first thing I'll delete when I'm commisioner: stupid circle.

  2. #2
    Wasting Light Hicks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    52,583
    Mood

    Default Re: Does any one else thing that "no charge zone" is stupid

    I agree. I'd rather they just call it the same everwhere.

  3. #3

    Default Re: Does any one else thing that "no charge zone" is stupid

    Quote Originally Posted by vapacersfan
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Can I be the disciplinarian of players?
    That'll cost you.


  4. #4
    Administrator Unclebuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    32,711

    Default Re: Does any one else thing that "no charge zone" is stupid

    I like the rule. Why is it fair for the defender to stand directly under the basket and get the charge call. I like the rule a lot.

    Keep in mind this is not a new "rule" It was always an unspoken rule, NBA refs did not give the charging call if the defender was too close to the basket. The only difference now is that they actually painted a stripe

  5. #5
    Wasting Light Hicks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    52,583
    Mood

    Default Re: Does any one else thing that "no charge zone" is stupid

    Quote Originally Posted by Unclebuck
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I like the rule. Why is it fair for the defender to stand directly under the basket and get the charge call. I like the rule a lot.
    If the defender is bulled over by the other team, that shouldn't ever go in the 'bull's' favor.

  6. #6
    Member skyfire's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Age
    32
    Posts
    1,558

    Default Re: Does any one else thing that "no charge zone" is stupid

    I agree with UB, defenders shouldn't be able to take charges right under the basket.

    In the NBL (aussie league) there is no painted semi-circle and I crave for them to paint one on there soo often. The less gray area that is left to the refs the better.

    The only downside I can see is that defenders sometimes seem to quickly jump outside the circle and dont really have position some of the time and because the refs are just looking for the position of the feet they dont really watch the whole play.

  7. #7
    Administrator Unclebuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    32,711

    Default Re: Does any one else thing that "no charge zone" is stupid

    Quote Originally Posted by Hicks
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    If the defender is bulled over by the other team, that shouldn't ever go in the 'bull's' favor.


    The no charge line does not effect lost post defense, it only effects drives to the hoop. Not sure if that has any effect on what you are saying.

    OK, so let me ask this should the defender be able to stand actually right underneath the basket and pick up a charge call.

  8. #8
    flexible and robust SoupIsGood's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Lappy Go Hucky
    Age
    26
    Posts
    17,540

    Default Re: Does any one else thing that "no charge zone" is stupid

    I like the rule.
    You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

  9. #9
    Wasting Light Hicks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    52,583
    Mood

    Default Re: Does any one else thing that "no charge zone" is stupid

    Quote Originally Posted by Unclebuck
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    OK, so let me ask this should the defender be able to stand actually right underneath the basket and pick up a charge call.
    If I'm correct in that you can only draw the foul by standing still and they bull into you, of if they lean in heavily with their shoulder, or swing and nail you with an elbow, then yes I think it should. I think it would be the correct call, and wouldn't happen that often because normally if the defender is under the basket, the offensive player is clear to lay it in or dunk it. But on those rare occasions the offensive player is out of control or throws an elbow, it should still be called.

  10. #10
    Administrator Unclebuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    32,711

    Default Re: Does any one else thing that "no charge zone" is stupid

    Quote Originally Posted by Hicks
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    If I'm correct in that you can only draw the foul by standing still and they bull into you, of if they lean in heavily with their shoulder, or swing and nail you with an elbow, then yes I think it should. I think it would be the correct call, and wouldn't happen that often because normally if the defender is under the basket, the offensive player is clear to lay it in or dunk it. But on those rare occasions the offensive player is out of control or throws an elbow, it should still be called.
    OK, I guess we just disagree

  11. #11
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    South Side
    Posts
    4,129

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Does any one else thing that "no charge zone" is stupid

    Quote Originally Posted by Unclebuck
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I like the rule. Why is it fair for the defender to stand directly under the basket and get the charge call. I like the rule a lot.

    Keep in mind this is not a new "rule" It was always an unspoken rule, NBA refs did not give the charging call if the defender was too close to the basket. The only difference now is that they actually painted a stripe
    The negative though is that refs seem to strictly look at the line instead of whether the player was set. I've seen many times where the defender was moving but a charge was called because they were outside the circle.

    That said, I'm not completely against the circle. But more emphasis should be on whether the defender is stationary rather than whether they're outside the circle.

  12. #12
    Administrator Unclebuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    32,711

    Default Re: Does any one else thing that "no charge zone" is stupid

    Quote Originally Posted by shags
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    The negative though is that refs seem to strictly look at the line instead of whether the player was set. I've seen many times where the defender was moving but a charge was called because they were outside the circle.

    That said, I'm not completely against the circle. But more emphasis should be on whether the defender is stationary rather than whether they're outside the circle.
    I would agree with you

  13. #13

    Default Re: Does any one else thing that "no charge zone" is stupid

    The circle definitely has its pro's and con's, but ultimately I thikn it's good for basketball, otherwise everytime someone went up for a lay-up/dunk the defender would just sit under there and take the charge...which is rediculous...granted that's what the rules are.

    NOW, if there is a rule that should be cahnged is how football regulates being too ruff when tackling...lol, just a random thought...

  14. #14
    White and Nerdy Anthem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    23,738

    Default Re: Does any one else thing that "no charge zone" is stupid

    Quote Originally Posted by shags
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    The negative though is that refs seem to strictly look at the line instead of whether the player was set. I've seen many times where the defender was moving but a charge was called because they were outside the circle.

    That said, I'm not completely against the circle. But more emphasis should be on whether the defender is stationary rather than whether they're outside the circle.
    My thoughts exactly.

  15. #15
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Phoenix, AZ
    Age
    40
    Posts
    726

    Default Re: Does any one else thing that "no charge zone" is stupid

    The semi-circle is good... I believe it is used as a guide or parameter related to offensive moves initiated outside of the freethrow lane/the painted area... whereas offensive moves started on the block or inside the lane it isn't acknowledged.(I could be very wrong here.)

    But post defense is another can of worms... alot has to do with arm postioning and dis-lodging and such... Shaq and Duncan have there own relative parameters... not unlike Jordan on the Perimeter.

  16. #16

    Default Re: Does any one else thing that "no charge zone" is stupid

    I guess I don't really mind it that much, but every once in a while I'll see a call where, to me, the defender had great position inside the circle for an extended period of time, and the offensive player will just run into him and get the charge. To me, if the guy sees you driving at the 3 point line, and is in position to cut you off by the time you get to the free throw line, and you continue your drive, you should get called for the charge no matter where on the floor the defender is. I understand that the line was put in place to keep guys from sliding over a tenth of a second before contact 1 foot from the basket, but there needs to be some sort of middle ground. I guess that's my problem with the line. There's too much Black and White, and it doesn't give officials any gray area to enforce the spirit of the rule, not just the letter of the law.

  17. #17

    Default Re: Does any one else thing that "no charge zone" is stupid

    I'll second or third what shags said. I think it's a good idea but every game you watch players slide themselves into position trying to get the charge call (and sometimes arguing when they're called on it) and that's what I don't like. Even when my team does it.

  18. #18
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Frankfort, IN
    Posts
    9,096

    Default Re: Does any one else thing that "no charge zone" is stupid

    Quote Originally Posted by Unclebuck
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    OK, so let me ask this should the defender be able to stand actually right underneath the basket and pick up a charge call.
    In that case the ball will usually be gone by the time contact's made so there wouldn't be a foul call (not in my world anyway). But if they have to go through a player to make a play the foul should be called.

    I've always thought that circle was stupid.
    The poster formerly known as Rimfire

  19. #19
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Frankfort, IN
    Posts
    9,096

    Default Re: Does any one else thing that "no charge zone" is stupid

    Quote Originally Posted by vapacersfan
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Can I be the disciplinarian of players?
    Well, uh, whatever you're into but if you're gonna wear black leather and carry a whip ...
    The poster formerly known as Rimfire

  20. #20
    CA Pacer Fan A-Train's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Posts
    1,281

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Does any one else thing that "no charge zone" is stupid

    Quote Originally Posted by DisplacedKnick
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    In that case the ball will usually be gone by the time contact's made so there wouldn't be a foul call (not in my world anyway). But if they have to go through a player to make a play the foul should be called.
    And that's exactly why the rule exists. A player shouldn't be allowed to stand under the basket and "take a charge" after the ball has left the offensive player's hands. Without the circle (and, as UB pointed out, the rule has always existed, there just hasn't been a circle to define the area), a defensive player could do just that. I like the rule AND the circle.

    Quote Originally Posted by shags
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    The negative though is that refs seem to strictly look at the line instead of whether the player was set. I've seen many times where the defender was moving but a charge was called because they were outside the circle.
    That part of the rule annoys me, too. I still recall Jason Kidd pulling that trick against us several times in the playoffs a few years ago.

    Doesn't mean the spirit of the rule is wrong, though.

  21. #21
    Member SycamoreKen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Houston, Texas
    Age
    44
    Posts
    10,431

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Does any one else thing that "no charge zone" is stupid

    [QUOTE=A-Train]And that's exactly why the rule exists. A player shouldn't be allowed to stand under the basket and "take a charge" after the ball has left the offensive player's hands. [QUOTE]

    Then get rid of the circle and make it not a charge if the ball is out of the players hand when contact is made. I have sen too many good defensive plays called the wrong way because a part of the defenders foot was still in the cicrle when he had good pasotion otherwise. I thought the charge block rule stated the defender had to be in position long enough for the offensive man to change his direction before contact?

  22. #22
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Frankfort, IN
    Posts
    9,096

    Default Re: Does any one else thing that "no charge zone" is stupid

    Quote Originally Posted by A-Train
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    And that's exactly why the rule exists. A player shouldn't be allowed to stand under the basket and "take a charge" after the ball has left the offensive player's hands. Without the circle (and, as UB pointed out, the rule has always existed, there just hasn't been a circle to define the area), a defensive player could do just that. I like the rule AND the circle.
    So why do you need the circle? Once the ball's left the player's hand he's no longer a defender - he's just a player who happens to be standing there and can't draw a charge. If the ball's still in the player's hand then he's a defender - and can draw a charge.

    What's the point of the circle?
    The poster formerly known as Rimfire

  23. #23
    Banned Fool's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    2,408

    Default Re: Does any one else thing that "no charge zone" is stupid

    I like the circle, what always annoys me is when fans complain that the defender was moving and thus shouldn't have gotten the call. (this is a bit off topic)

    From NBA.com's "Official Rules"

    http://www.nba.com/analysis/rules_a....av=ArticleList

    2. Guarding an Opponent
    In all guarding situations, a player is entitled to any spot on the court he desires, provided he legally gets to that spot first and without contact with an opponent. If a defensive or offensive player has established a position on the floor and his opponent initiates contact that results in the dislodging of the opponent, a foul should be called IMMEDIATELY.

    During all throw-ins, the defensive player(s) must be allowed to take a position between his man and the basket.

    A player may continue to move after gaining a guarding position in the path of an opponent provided he is not moving directly or obliquely toward his opponent when contact occurs. A player is never permitted to move into the path of an opponent after the opponent has jumped into the air.

    A player who extends a hand, forearm, shoulder, hip or leg into the path of an opponent and thereby causes contact is not considered to have a legal position in the path of an opponent.

    A player is entitled to a vertical position even to the extent of holding his arms above his shoulders, as in post play or when double-teaming in pressing tactics.

    Any player who conforms to the above is absolved from responsibility for any contact by an opponent which may dislodge or tend to dislodge such player from the position which he has attained and is maintaining legally. If contact occurs, the official must decide whether the contact is incidental or a foul has been committed.


    If the defender has position, of course he is allowed to move laterally to keep that position. Otherwise, no one would be able to play defense and only the dumbest players would ever get called for charging.

  24. #24
    CA Pacer Fan A-Train's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Posts
    1,281

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Does any one else thing that "no charge zone" is stupid

    Quote Originally Posted by DisplacedKnick
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    So why do you need the circle? Once the ball's left the player's hand he's no longer a defender - he's just a player who happens to be standing there and can't draw a charge. If the ball's still in the player's hand then he's a defender - and can draw a charge.

    What's the point of the circle?
    There are places on the floor where that isn't true, though. A player can shoot the ball from 15 feet then fall into a guy who is stationary and it's an offensive foul. They've made a distinction between a jump shooter bowling a defender over and a guy shooting a lay up falling into a guy underneath the basket.

    The circle helps draw the line between the two... literally.

  25. #25
    Member Since86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Muncie
    Posts
    20,896

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Does any one else thing that "no charge zone" is stupid

    Quote Originally Posted by DisplacedKnick
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    So why do you need the circle? Once the ball's left the player's hand he's no longer a defender - he's just a player who happens to be standing there and can't draw a charge. If the ball's still in the player's hand then he's a defender - and can draw a charge.

    What's the point of the circle?
    The point is that the players are too athletic to stay with the original rules. A player can jump 10+ feet away from the basket, and be up in the air atleast a second, probably more. One second isn't a lot when you're talking every day activities, but it's quite a bit when talking about sport reflexes and the amount of ground they can cover in that time. It makes the D try to read the move and not let him cheat by slipping under him while he's already in the air.

    I like the rule, but I wish they'd make the line like in tennis. If their feet are on the line it's good enough. Making them be all the way outside makes them worry about if their out or not, when they could be stationary a lot longer.
    Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right. ― Ricky Gervais.

    What if someone from a school of business or management school were to ask, How did you do this? How did you get the Pacers turned around? Is there a general approach you've taken that can be summarized?

    Larry Bird: Yeah, patience.

Posting Permissions

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