Quote:
Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.
Quote:
Originally posted by BktBallRef
Mark, for all your yapping, 4 consecutive replies, you have yet to describe a situation where a defender sets a screen. Instead, you keep describing plays where the defender commits a blocking foul. That's my point! A blocking foul is not a screen. Please describe a play where the defender is legally screening.
We're still waiting.
|
Tony:
Go back to my example. If B4 gives time and distance to A1, then B4 has set a legal screen. R4-S39 defines what a screen is supposed to do. If B4 sets a legal screen then we do not have a blocking foul. A player sets a screen, either the player has set the screen legally or he has not. If the player has not set the screen legally and contact occurs then the player has committed a blocking foul.
I do not understand why people are having a problem with the fact that defenders can set screens.
|
Probably because the rule book says that those defenders are freaking GUARDING. Rule 4-23-1 -
"Guarding is the act of legally placing the body in the path of an OFFENSIVE opponent". I repeat-
OFFENSIVE OPPONENT!!!! If B4 gives time and distance to A1,as in your example, then B4 is LEGALLY GUARDING A1. A1 would then be responsible for any contact.If B4 isn't LEGALLY GUARDING A1, then B4 is responsible for any contact and the call is a block on B4 for a defender ILLEGALLY GUARDING an offensive opponent. I can't understand why you are compelled to try to make another rule fit that was never intended to be used for this particuar situation,when there is a perfectly good and explicit rule available in R4-23.