Worst Rule in the NBA???

[Mike]

Incidentally, here is the language on the restricted area.  So it is pretty clear that the rule established two things.  One, you can't draw an offensive foul on a player when you are standing in the circle (so long as the offensive player doesn't receive the ball in the lower box).  Two, the refs certainly can call a foul on the defense if there is more than incidental contact (as there often is).  Nowhere does it say that it SHOULD be a no call.  

An offensive foul should never be called if the contact is with a secondary defensive player who has established a defensive position within a designated “restricted area” near the basket for the purpose of drawing an offensive foul.

The “restricted area” for this purpose is the area bounded by an arc with a 4-foot radius measured from the middle of the basket as stated in nba basketball rules.

EXCEPTION: Any player may be legally positioned within the “restricted area” if the offensive player receives the ball within the Lower Defensive Box.

The mere fact that contact occurs on these type of plays, or any other similar play, does not necessarily mean that a personal foul has been committed. The officials must decide whether the contact is negligible and/or incidental, judging each situation separately.

I think it's insane that "An offensive foul should never be called if the contact is with a secondary defensive player who has established a defensive position within a designated “restricted area” near the basket for the purpose of drawing an offensive foul."

So if a player tries to take a charge, but is inside the circle, the offensive player can elbow the defender in the gut, punch him in the face if he likes, etc, and cannot be called for an offensive foul?

Dumb.

[fairweatherfan]

You're reading the rule as if the burden is on it declaring that there should be a no call in certain situations.

Rather the rule states that it cannot be a charge call in the restricted circle. Currently the refs make it an automatic foul on the defender, which isn't stated anywhere in the rule. Instead it just says there can't be a charge and that not all contact is a foul.

This is the key to the rule in my opinion:

The mere fact that contact occurs on these type of plays, or any other similar play, does not necessarily mean that a personal foul has been committed. The officials must decide whether the contact is negligible and/or incidental, judging each situation separately.

In other words, contact in the circle isn't necessarily a defensive foul, but the highlighted sentence seems to clearly imply that contact in the circle that is beyond negligible or incidental should be called a defensive foul.  Pretty much any time a guy is set in the circle the contact is going to be beyond incidental/negligible, so the foul should be called.

[Fafnir]

Incidentally, here is the language on the restricted area.  So it is pretty clear that the rule established two things.  One, you can't draw an offensive foul on a player when you are standing in the circle (so long as the offensive player doesn't receive the ball in the lower box).  Two, the refs certainly can call a foul on the defense if there is more than incidental contact (as there often is).  Nowhere does it say that it SHOULD be a no call.  

An offensive foul should never be called if the contact is with a secondary defensive player who has established a defensive position within a designated “restricted area” near the basket for the purpose of drawing an offensive foul.

The “restricted area” for this purpose is the area bounded by an arc with a 4-foot radius measured from the middle of the basket as stated in nba basketball rules.

EXCEPTION: Any player may be legally positioned within the “restricted area” if the offensive player receives the ball within the Lower Defensive Box.

The mere fact that contact occurs on these type of plays, or any other similar play, does not necessarily mean that a personal foul has been committed. The officials must decide whether the contact is negligible and/or incidental, judging each situation separately.

I think it's insane that "An offensive foul should never be called if the contact is with a secondary defensive player who has established a defensive position within a designated “restricted area” near the basket for the purpose of drawing an offensive foul."

So if a player tries to take a charge, but is inside the circle, the offensive player can elbow the defender in the gut, punch him in the face if he likes, etc, and cannot be called for an offensive foul?

Dumb.

No, you can still be called for an offensive foul for those sort of things. For example using your off arm to ward off a shot blocker is called without considering the restricted circle.

[droopdog7]

You're reading the rule as if the burden is on it declaring that there should be a no call in certain situations.

Rather the rule states that it cannot be a charge call in the restricted circle. Currently the refs make it an automatic foul on the defender, which isn't stated anywhere in the rule. Instead it just says there can't be a charge and that not all contact is a foul.

This is the key to the rule in my opinion:

The mere fact that contact occurs on these type of plays, or any other similar play, does not necessarily mean that a personal foul has been committed. The officials must decide whether the contact is negligible and/or incidental, judging each situation separately.

In other words, contact in the circle isn't necessarily a defensive foul, but the highlighted sentence seems to clearly imply that contact in the circle that is beyond negligible or incidental should be called a defensive foul.  Pretty much any time a guy is set in the circle the contact is going to be beyond incidental/negligible, so the foul should be called.

BINGO.  When have you seen contact with a guy standing in the circle that is neglible?  Rarely.

And my point was, the rules doesn't in any way state that it should be a no call.  Indeed, as long as there is contact beyond neglible, it will be a block.

[droopdog7]

I haven't read a single complaint about a rule on this thread that is legit. . . . The charge call is also good and as far as i have seen, is called about as fairly as possible.

Really?  When is the last time you saw refs ignore contact in the circle that would normally be a charge, instead calling it a "no call / play on"?  That play is almost uniformly called a defensive foul, when in fact it isn't. 

I'm surprised you feel that that call is made correctly the majority of the time.  The refs do a good job of discerning what is / isn't in the circle, but once the play is in the circle, they do a terrible job of enforcing the rules.  (Which is why announcers so often focus on "was the defender in the circle" rather than on "did he have his feet set with position").

Just to be clear, I am not claiming that refs call blocking/charging calls well in general (as I think you understand).  And yes, I meant that the refs to a good job of determining whether the player is in the circle for the most part.

By my question is, who says that it should be a no call?  From my understanding, if a player is standing in a place he should be standing in (i.e., inside the circle), it should be a foul.  I mean, there certainly are all kinds of contact and letting these things just play on could create dangerous situation.

So bascically, if you can't get in position outside the circle to take a block, then move out of the way or you will get a foul.

And just in case it isn't clear, I believe the rule changes when a player starts his move close to the rim.  There, the circle doesn't matter.

NBA players are allowed to be in the Circle on defense.  If they weren't, the NBA would be saying teams are not allowed to defend the basket.


I think it is a stupid rule.  A charge should be a charge, whether or not you have a heel in the line.  Reward good positioning. 

If you draw what would be considered a charge under the basket, it should be a no call (since that is not good defensive positioning)



There are a lot of rules I hate.  The 5 second post up rule.  The defensive 3 seconds.  The circle. 



But you can live with them if they could ever get consistency out of the game calls. 

Do yuo ever watch high school basketball?  There, you'll see guys standing almost directly under the rim taking "charges".  Players already laid the ball in and land on a guy and get a charge.  Now mind you, high refs are horrible beying belief.  But this strategy is pretty dangerous.  And when you see it, it reeks of stupid.  And it is.

Before the circle, refs would not give a guy the block call if he was under the basket but there was no formal rule.  Now at least it can be called consistently.

Was this an issue in the NBA before the circle was added?

As far as I remembered, it wasn't.  This was a creation to allow players more dunk opportunities as a way to boost ratings. 

It WAS an issue for the very reasons that I mentioned. One, it is dangerous.  Two, some NBA were already not giving defenders the benefit of the doubt when they were too close to the rim.  But since there was not formal rule, it was not called consistently.  Now at least, it can be.

When was this an issue in the NBA?  Your example is a high school game.  

How do I give you an example?  All I can recall is what I said.  Some refs were not giving players the benefit of the doubt if they deemed the defender too close to the basket already.  But since there wasn't a rule, it could not be applied consitently.  The circle merely clarifies matters.

[Mike]

Incidentally, here is the language on the restricted area.  So it is pretty clear that the rule established two things.  One, you can't draw an offensive foul on a player when you are standing in the circle (so long as the offensive player doesn't receive the ball in the lower box).  Two, the refs certainly can call a foul on the defense if there is more than incidental contact (as there often is).  Nowhere does it say that it SHOULD be a no call.  

An offensive foul should never be called if the contact is with a secondary defensive player who has established a defensive position within a designated “restricted area” near the basket for the purpose of drawing an offensive foul.

The “restricted area” for this purpose is the area bounded by an arc with a 4-foot radius measured from the middle of the basket as stated in nba basketball rules.

EXCEPTION: Any player may be legally positioned within the “restricted area” if the offensive player receives the ball within the Lower Defensive Box.

The mere fact that contact occurs on these type of plays, or any other similar play, does not necessarily mean that a personal foul has been committed. The officials must decide whether the contact is negligible and/or incidental, judging each situation separately.

I think it's insane that "An offensive foul should never be called if the contact is with a secondary defensive player who has established a defensive position within a designated “restricted area” near the basket for the purpose of drawing an offensive foul."

So if a player tries to take a charge, but is inside the circle, the offensive player can elbow the defender in the gut, punch him in the face if he likes, etc, and cannot be called for an offensive foul?

Dumb.

No, you can still be called for an offensive foul for those sort of things. For example using your off arm to ward off a shot blocker is called without considering the restricted circle.

I hope this is true. The way I read that rule, though, it seems that an offensive player CANNOT be called for a foul if the defender is in the circle attempting to take a charge.

[droopdog7]

Incidentally, here is the language on the restricted area.  So it is pretty clear that the rule established two things.  One, you can't draw an offensive foul on a player when you are standing in the circle (so long as the offensive player doesn't receive the ball in the lower box).  Two, the refs certainly can call a foul on the defense if there is more than incidental contact (as there often is).  Nowhere does it say that it SHOULD be a no call.  

An offensive foul should never be called if the contact is with a secondary defensive player who has established a defensive position within a designated “restricted area” near the basket for the purpose of drawing an offensive foul.

The “restricted area” for this purpose is the area bounded by an arc with a 4-foot radius measured from the middle of the basket as stated in nba basketball rules.

EXCEPTION: Any player may be legally positioned within the “restricted area” if the offensive player receives the ball within the Lower Defensive Box.

The mere fact that contact occurs on these type of plays, or any other similar play, does not necessarily mean that a personal foul has been committed. The officials must decide whether the contact is negligible and/or incidental, judging each situation separately.

I think it's insane that "An offensive foul should never be called if the contact is with a secondary defensive player who has established a defensive position within a designated “restricted area” near the basket for the purpose of drawing an offensive foul."

So if a player tries to take a charge, but is inside the circle, the offensive player can elbow the defender in the gut, punch him in the face if he likes, etc, and cannot be called for an offensive foul?

Dumb.

No, you can still be called for an offensive foul for those sort of things. For example using your off arm to ward off a shot blocker is called without considering the restricted circle.

I hope this is true. The way I read that rule, though, it seems that an offensive player CANNOT be called for a foul if the defender is in the circle attempting to take a charge.

Well, in a normal basketball sense, you are correct.  But what you described isn't normal basketball, though I know things happen.

[Fafnir]

I hope this is true. The way I read that rule, though, it seems that an offensive player CANNOT be called for a foul if the defender is in the circle attempting to take a charge.

The restricted circle section is only addressing the block/charge call. It doesn't overide the rest of the rules against leg kicks, elbows, or using the off arm.

[Finkelskyhook]

When the NBA is keeping statistics for most charges "drawn", there's a major problem with the lack of interpretation and enforcement of the rule implemented by the NBA last season.  About 80% of the charges being called are grossly bogus.  Makes a complete mockery of the NBA game.

Does the NBA keep stats for most flops?

[Fafnir]

When the NBA is keeping statistics for most charges "drawn", there's a major problem with the lack of interpretation and enforcement of the rule implemented by the NBA last season.  About 80% of the charges being called are grossly bogus.  Makes a complete mockery of the NBA game.

Does the NBA keep stats for most flops?

Wait so most charges aren't legit? Then how can LeBron committ so many uncalled charges?

[Master Po]

I still don't like the 5 second dribble rule 

[Fafnir]

I still don't like the 5 second dribble rule 

I didn't even know that rule existed before yesterday.

I don't see why its there honestly.

[Chris]

I still don't like the 5 second dribble rule 

I didn't even know that rule existed before yesterday.

I don't see why its there honestly.

I think its a good rule.  Keeps guys from just holding the ball in the post forever.  Its just never actually enforced.

[CelticG1]

I still don't like the 5 second dribble rule 

I didn't even know that rule existed before yesterday.

I don't see why its there honestly.

Even if it's stupid, when it is called as seldom as it is than it is kind of irrelevant and it obviously doesn't affect the game on an every day basis.

I still agree with the other poster about how stupid it is that you get to advance the ball past half court when you have a timeout in late game situations.

[Finkelskyhook]

I still don't like the 5 second dribble rule 

I didn't even know that rule existed before yesterday.

I don't see why its there honestly.

It's called about as often as the 10 second free throw rule they called against Dwight Howard when they played us in Orlando.
Even if it's stupid, when it is called as seldom as it is than it is kind of irrelevant and it obviously doesn't affect the game on an every day basis.

I still agree with the other poster about how stupid it is that you get to advance the ball past half court when you have a timeout in late game situations.