Block/charge calls now reviewable in B1G

Submitted by Wolverine Devotee on

Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

http://www.ncaa.com/news/basketball-men/article/2016-10-18/mens-basketb…

The NCAA Playing Rules Oversight Panel has approved an experimental rule that will allow the Big Ten and Mid-American conferences to use instant replay on certain plays within the restricted area arc during the 2016-17 season.

The experimental rule, which will be in effect only during conference play, can be used when an official believes that an incorrect call was made on a restricted area ruling, or when a head coach makes an appeal for a review. 

If a coach appeals and the instant-replay review determines the official’s call was correct, the appealing coach’s team will be charged a timeout. If the call is reversed on appeal, no timeout will be charged.

 

The experimental rule can be applied only during Big Ten and Mid-American conference games under the following conditions:

  • Instant replay can be used only in the last two minutes of the second half or the last two minutes of any overtime period.
  • Instant replay may be used only when an official has made a block/charge call in or around the restricted area arc, and the decision is based on whether the defensive player was in or outside the arc. Instant replay may not be used on no-calls.
  • Any review, whether by the officials or a coach’s appeal, must be recognized and corrected before the ball next becomes live. 
MGoBoard
Basketball

J.

October 18th, 2016 at 8:30 PM ^

This rule is too limited to be useful, so all it will really do is infuriate people when they find that some particular blown call isn't reviewable, while, elsewhere, they spend ten minutes trying (and failing) to get a borderline call correct in a 75-38 game.

Joined: 03/11/2012

MGoPoints: 13057

Lionsfan

October 18th, 2016 at 8:36 PM ^

It's only going to be during the final two minutes, and all they're going to check is if the defender was in the restricted line or not.

As far as experimental rules goes, it's really not that bad

Joined: 06/03/2011

MGoPoints: 2533

MGoBender

October 18th, 2016 at 9:17 PM ^

If we want to be technical, a defender does not need to be "set."  That's a common misconception that leads to anger.  Granted the rule is constantly changing, but a defender needs to establish and maintain legal guarding position. Once you have it, your feet can be sliding or your body moving and still be able to draw a charge.

Joined: 03/26/2010

MGoPoints: 15128

ESNY

October 18th, 2016 at 9:15 PM ^

Agreed, its a big nothing.  How many block/charge calls hinge on whether or not the player's foot was in the restricted circle?  T

This won't address the bigger issue of complete inconsistency in what is a charge vs. a block as far as the player having position.  I am curious that if they call a play a block due to the defenders foot in the restricted area and then upon replay confirm the player was outside the area but also not set or directly in front of the ballhandler, thus not a charge, what are they going to call?  Do they still have to call it a charge even if it wasn't a charge just because they called it a block initially?

Joined: 11/06/2008

MGoPoints: 12305

Mr Miggle

October 18th, 2016 at 10:11 PM ^

I feel like the post is badly titled because WD didn't bother to read it and other commenters just followed along.

How many charge calls are going to be challenged? They have to be in the last two minutes. Have to have been called charges. Can only be disputed on the basis of the defender being outside of the arc. And it's an experiment in two leagues, to see whether it's effective.

I should point out these are big calls to get wrong. A foul plus a change in possession at the end of a close game could easily swing the result. This seems like a really good thing to at least try, but some people just like to bitch.

 

Joined: 10/07/2010

MGoPoints: 47530

jmblue

October 19th, 2016 at 11:28 AM ^

I don't like the two-minute qualifier here.  It's not like calls in the first 38 minutes are meaningless.  Remember the killer blocking foul on Mo Wagner in the tournament last spring?  That was with about five minutes left.  It would have been nice to review that, too.

I think a rule should apply for the entire game or not at all.  Don't have one rule for a charge/block with 2:05 to go and another for one with 1:55.

 

Joined: 11/07/2008

MGoPoints: 102715

Gulo_Gulo

October 19th, 2016 at 2:25 PM ^

I hate the line of thought that the final 2 minutes are more important than the rest of the game.  If it is "important" enough to review at the end of the game, it's important enough at the beginning.  Football had some kind of convoluted logic like this as well at one point.

Joined: 11/06/2011

MGoPoints: 422

stephenrjking

October 18th, 2016 at 8:41 PM ^

This seems like a terrible idea. I echo J's criticism that the application is too narrow to do much good and will lead to more frustration when other blatantly bad calls cannot be reviewed, though at least they are wisely attempting to limit the scope to something that can theoretically be objectively determined. And I echo the complaints of others that stoppages will be maddening.

I mean, I guess there will be a call or two that is reversed correctly, and that will be good, but this seems like a lot of trouble for a very small benefit. 

My prediction: Chaos.

Joined: 03/15/2012

MGoPoints: 20143524

ijohnb

October 19th, 2016 at 10:03 AM ^

is just it, the application is supposed to be narrow but it won't be.  The officials will basically end up blowing the whistle because "something" happenned and then they will go to the monitor to figure it out.  Chaos will ensue.  I would happily just give up instant replay right now in all sports, in all circumstances.  Calls even out over the course of the game, and none of the officials are being trained as to how to apply the replay rules consistently.  The fact that there is a difference between a play "standing as called" and being "affirmed" is an indication that this entire things has gotten away from them, and they need to severely reel in the application of instant replay or eliminate it entirely.

Joined: 09/21/2009

MGoPoints: 69986

LSAClassOf2000

October 18th, 2016 at 8:53 PM ^

I'll withhold judgment on this instant replay experiment for now (I kind of like to have the fan / viewer experience myself first), but I am fairly sure that ridiculous happens when the reviews themselves become reviewable, creating a weird meta chain of reviews of reviews, holding up games for days in some instances. 

Joined: 01/07/2011

MGoPoints: 130561

carolina blue

October 18th, 2016 at 8:45 PM ^

I've never understood the premise behind review rules. "Our referees are sometime fallible when looking at obvious yes/no issues, but their judgement shall not be questioned "



Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

Joined: 02/12/2014

MGoPoints: 30251

MGoBender

October 18th, 2016 at 9:20 PM ^

It's more "holding can be called every play."

Officials determine in a game how much contact is allowed, what is a foul, what isn't. It's not like they make up the rule as they go, but there's a certain point where you have to subjectively decided what contact does and does not affect the play.  There are some cut and dry rules (two hands on ball handler, hand on hip of ball-handler, forearm on ballhandler) that are used to help with judgement calls.  But if you start reviewing how much contact was made and what affect it had on a player, you're reviewing several interactions per possession.

Joined: 03/26/2010

MGoPoints: 15128

carolina blue

October 18th, 2016 at 10:17 PM ^

I'm thinking more of the jersey pull on a receiver that the back judge can't see because the CB has blocked him from view and other similar calls.

That doesn't begin to describe things like chop blocks (or whatever the call is where a player is simultaneously blocked high and low). It's a huge penalty and should be reviewable. He was either engaged high and low or not.



Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

Joined: 02/12/2014

MGoPoints: 30251

taistreetsmyhero

October 18th, 2016 at 8:50 PM ^

This will fix very few calls as they are so difficult to figure out which is correct even on replay, and there's the bullshit rule that it must be 100% conclusive to overturn. I don't really understand the principle behind review rules. Shouldn't the goal be to get the most correct calls? If you just go with what most likely happened, then you will get more correct calls. Who cares what the ref called on the field?



Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

Joined: 08/08/2012

MGoPoints: 39396

carolina blue

October 18th, 2016 at 8:53 PM ^

It matters what the ref called for replays like goal line stands. If the ref called touchdown (I know this is b-ball but we know football better) and, on replay, there is such a mass of bodies that you have absolutely no idea what really happened, you have no choice to go with the original call.



Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

Joined: 02/12/2014

MGoPoints: 30251

travesty

October 18th, 2016 at 9:12 PM ^

The problem with replay in basketball is that it is interminable. Most of the time, while we've already seen what the obviously correct call is 20 times on tv, the official is still trying to get some guy in some booth somewhere to show him the replay on his little camping tv that somehow dropped in from the 90's at the scorer's table.  And then, once he's finally made his decision on the call, it'll be another five minutes while he gets the gameclock correct to the tenth of a second.  It's just usually not worth the aggravation.

Joined: 07/08/2008

MGoPoints: 263

Mannix

October 18th, 2016 at 10:51 PM ^

I'd much rather see the call that is screwed up far more often- the clean block by defender while the ref says, "Got him with the body" to bail himself out.

First, start with Burke's clean block in NCAA championship game vs Louisville.

Joined: 01/15/2009

MGoPoints: 12243