The shooter had already gone up for the shot. No way could he avoid Craft. The argument could be made that craft was the aggresor, not the offensive player.
These charges are getting way out of control. They are called with to much regularity to actually be called "charges". A charge should be an obvious call where a defender is protecting a space in which the offensive player intrudes upon. Not the way it is called now. Hence the 65-55 pt games in NCAA's.
What bothers me even more is that lug head saying refs miss calls all the time and it works out for both teams...No it doesn't. They can miss calls for the same team over and over again which happened in this game. The called a block on ISU when Craft went left and had no where to go, forced himself into an awkard runner almost behind the backboard. You even heard an ISU player yell "he had no where to go ref"!
Anyway...I had ISU +8 so not bitching about the outcome at all. Just charges in general are a joke these days.
These charges are getting way out of control. They are called with to much regularity to actually be called "charges". A charge should be an obvious call where a defender is protecting a space in which the offensive player intrudes upon. Not the way it is called now. Hence the 65-55 pt games in NCAA's.
What bothers me even more is that lug head saying refs miss calls all the time and it works out for both teams...No it doesn't. They can miss calls for the same team over and over again which happened in this game. The called a block on ISU when Craft went left and had no where to go, forced himself into an awkard runner almost behind the backboard. You even heard an ISU player yell "he had no where to go ref"!
Anyway...I had ISU +8 so not bitching about the outcome at all. Just charges in general are a joke these days.
that's what I thought, it was a bad call even if he wasn't in the circle
the shooter left his feet when Craft moved into position
