View Single Post
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Fri Apr 02, 2004, 02:06pm
Mark Dexter Mark Dexter is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 4,801
Quote:
Originally posted by JRutledge
Z,

Again I think you are missing the original point. Just because there is contact, does not mean I am going to call a foul. I was taught when I played to try to fight through screens. If a player just gives up his rightful position because the player is in his way, then he/she was not stopped from doing anything. He/she decided to give up that position on their own and was not put at any disadvantage. Which goes back to the 4-27, Incidental Contact rule. Maybe the word "displacement" does not fit, but I am not calling a foul on a player that jsut touches another player and does not meet all the critria for a screen. Because if we called fouls on screens every time there was contact, we could call a foul on all screens.

Peace
I gotta agree with Rut on this. 99% of the time, displacement (or lack thereof) is a good way to judge whether or not the contact was incidental. Good athletes aren't going to be stopped by a small brush on an illegal screen.
__________________
"To win the game is great. To play the game is greater. But to love the game is the greatest of all."
Reply With Quote