[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

The wording of the Guarding and Screening Rules for boys'/girls high school and men's college have been same for well over 65 years. The wording of the Guarding Rule with respect to Obtaining (NFHS/NCAA Women's)/Establishing (NCAA Men's) is based upon two simple requirements: 1) The more important of the two: An Offensive Player must expect to be Guarded from the instant he/she gains Control of the Ball, which means that the concept of a Secondary Defender does not exist (Of course how the Closely Guarded Rule is adjudicated in NFHS is different from NCAA Men's/Women's even though the wording of the Rule is the same in all three Rules Codes, but that is a discussion for another time.); and 2) Guarding Rule applies to every square inch of the court when there is Team Control by Team A.

The first problem is that Players, Coaches, spectators, and Talking Knuckleheads (with Jay Bilas being the leading one) do not understand these two simple requirements. (It should be noted that the Guarding Rule is not in effect when neither Team has Control of the Ball, but that concept is part of my $100 seminar on Guarding and Screening, 🤣!)

The second, and more important, problem is that the three Rules Committees are dominated by members who are administrators and coaches [The 2022-23 NFHS Basketball Rules Committee consists of seven administrator/coaches (none of whom have ever officiated basketball), four basketball officials, and one administrator who was a long time basketball officials: That is seven people out of twelve that have neither officiating experience nor experience in the Rules of Basketball.] who do not have an understanding of why a current Rule is written as it is.

The NCAA Men's Basketball Rules Committee adopted a change to the Guarding Rule as it pertained to LGP for the 2013-14 that was rescinded by mid-season because it was unworkable and did not conform to the two requirements that I have previously given. This recommendation for the 2023-24 school year is just as absurd as the one that was adopted in 2013-14 and is just as unworkable as the one in 2013-14 because it does not conform to the two requirements that I have previously given.

MTD, Sr.