Oklahoma State ***OFFICIAL*** Game Thread

[jdshock]

If it helps, here's a no call from the same ref: http://gfycat.com/BadMenacingEsok

[AZ Shocker]

If it helps, here's a no call from the same ref: http://gfycat.com/BadMenacingEsok

Yep

[ShockdaWorld]

If it helps, here's a no call from the same ref: http://gfycat.com/BadMenacingEsok

So, according to these two videos, Shaq should've jumped and swung his arms in the general direction of Forte's head? It would appear that's what it takes to get a no call.

[im4wsu]

Over and over, frame by frame, and no movement out of Shaq. Arms stayed straight up even after Forte jumped into him and bounced off. Not the reason we lost by a long shot, but certainly a bad call.

Unless of course I am misinterpreting the rule and Shaq is NOT legally allowed to stand straight up with his hands extended straight over his head inside the arc. And if that's the case, he may as well lean into the little turds that come flying into him. May as well make them think twice about the next one if you're going to get a call anyway.

From teamspeedkills.com, it appears that the secondary defender must not have any foot on the ground inside the arc. This is also what I recalled from the explanatory video given earlier in the season

An “interpretation” means that the committee is clarifying a previous rule that might not have been clear. In this instance, the interpretation concerns the restricted arc. Under the previous rules, a defender inside the restricted arc could not take a charge and any contact with an offensive player would result in a blocking foul being called.
Now, so long as the defender maintains verticality (meaning he jumps straight up and holds his arms straight up in an attempt to block a shot), that defender will not be called for a blocking foul even if he is inside the restricted area. This interpretation effectively prevents an offensive player from picking up a cheap foul by leaning into a shot blocker who leapt from inside the restricted arc. But a defender who remains grounded is still subject to the rules concerning the restricted arc. So, too, is a defender who leaps out toward an offensive player, or who extends his arms parallel to the floor (Note: if you’re a stickler for the rulebook, this kind of play is also a blocking foul if the defender is outside the restricted arc).

[ShockdaWorld]

From teamspeedkills.com, it appears that the secondary defender must not have any foot on the ground inside the arc. This is also what I recalled from the explanatory video given earlier in the season

So everything was correct. Standing inside the arc is grounds for a blocking foul regardless of how vertical you are and how long you've been there. Better off to jump straight up and if they happen to hit the floor, oops.

[Shocktoberfest]

I slowed it down all the way, and it looks to me like his arms don't budge until the guy barrels into him. I do think that might be what got the foul called, though.

We were sitting underneath the goal and had a great look at the play from the side. Shaq did move his hands forward as Forte jumped into him. It wasn't a huge move, but he did move them forward a bit.

But whatever. We sucked on Saturday.

[Shocker-maniac]

So everything was correct. Standing inside the arc is grounds for a blocking foul regardless of how vertical you are and how long you've been there. Better off to jump straight up and if they happen to hit the floor, oops.

That makes sense.

[shockmonster]

That makes sense.

Not really. When you have to run away to avoid a foul, it is devoid of logic and a bad rule.

[Shocker-maniac]

Not really. When you have to run away to avoid a foul, it is devoid of logic and a bad rule.

Uhh, yeah, I was referring to the explanation, not the actual rule. Sheesh. #smh

[proshox]

Dude, c'mon. I know blaming the refs is basically a sport, but that wasn't even close to a charge. It was crazy how slowly Shaq responded to help. He didn't come within 3 feet of clearing the block/charge line.

You are allowed to be there if you jump. It just isn't a charge.

[1972Shocker]

You are allowed to be there if you jump. It just isn't a charge.

If you jump and maintain verticality.

[60Shock]

AAC's not going to make a decision based on a sample size of one game. Good grief.

Good grief back at you: Why don't you read the entire comment I wrote and not just the first sentence?

"We can only hope that the AAC Heads, their school AD’s, and coaches are intelligent enough to understand that one game in a rebuilding year does not take precedence over the outstanding record WSU and Coach Marshall have built over the last 10 years or so. Unfortunately, there are always soothsayers looking for the slightest flaw and it may only take one or two.

[ShockerFever]

I think you're both right. I clipped the video: http://gfycat.com/YawningSillyGuineapig

In my opinion, that shouldn't be called a foul, but he's definitely in the arc so it's not a charge.

NOT a foul.

What else is a guy supposed to do there? Forte could literally draw that same foul every single time if that's how things were to be called. No credit at all to the defensive player and rewarding an out of control drive with a guy flailing his hands in the air to get the bail out.

I HATE that ****. So much referee anticipation there. Garbage call.

[Aargh]

Shamet was beat the moment Forte touched the ball. If Shamet drops back toward the baseline to cut off the drive, Forte would have shot an open 3. Shamet closed, which cut the 3 off, but then Forte could drive around him. Morris didn't have time to get set outside the arc, and apparently would have been OK if he had jumped straight up, but it's an automatic foul on him if he doesn't. That's just weird and will never be called consistently.

[AZ Shocker]

Exactly. Shamet did everything right except anticipate Forte could go left thus exposing ShaQ for a **** call. Yes inexperienced Freshman guard used to playing high school ball. He heard about it in practice today.