View Single Post
  #15 (permalink)  
Old Mon Feb 20, 2017, 09:41am
JRutledge JRutledge is offline
Do not give a damn!!
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: On the border
Posts: 30,520
Quote:
Originally Posted by crosscountry55 View Post
1. Was the screen in the opponent's visual field, and did the screener give the opponent a normal step backwards?
Yes it was in his field of vision, all he had to do was turn his head. Regardless of this fact, he was given a step and took it and then the contact took place with a stationary screener.

Quote:
Originally Posted by crosscountry55 View Post
2. Was the screener's stance shoulder width apart?
Yes. He did not exaggerate his stance or set up in an unusual way.

Quote:
Originally Posted by crosscountry55 View Post
It's called an "illegal screen," not a "moving screen."
Agreed and if he did not give the proper time and distance, this would be a foul. This in my opinion was not a foul. And even if it was borderline I still would not want a foul called here.

Peace
__________________
Let us get into "Good Trouble."
-----------------------------------------------------------
Charles Michael “Mick” Chambers (1947-2010)
Reply With Quote