[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by rainmaker

1) Thanks for someone finally answering my question. I was starting to feel like Casper the Friendly Ghost. Oh, and I guess I ought to put in a gratuitous insult here, just so we don't get too chummy. Let's see, your mother is an English pig-dog and your father smells of elderberry wine! There, that doesn't sound obsequious, does it?

2)But seriously, Jurassic, there are some differences between guarding and screening in the rules, and that's what started this whole thread off. Is it the case that defense gets more latitude than offense in fronting the opponent?

1) At least you didn't hang Chuck from your rearview mirror when you were young, like someone I know.

2) I think that the reason that the NFHS put "guarding" and "screening" in two separate sections of Rule 4 is that they quite simply meant for one term(guarding) to apply to defensive players, and the other term (screening) to apply just to offensive players. If they had envisioned what MTD is trying to propose, they would have combined those 2 sections. R4-23-1 is quite explicit in saying that "guarding" is an act made a defender. The FED shoulda added in R4-39 that this act applies to offensive players only. Unfortunately, they didn't- so we end up in a pointless argument like this one about grey language in one section. And, also,to answer your question, the defense doesn't get any more latitude than the offense in fronting an opponent either. Both have to go by the rule that applies to them. In the case of the defense fronting an opponent, you can't go wrong if you just apply the "screening" rules to the offense- whether they have the ball or not-, and apply the "guarding" rules to the defense- and then call what happens.

[Edited by Jurassic Referee on May 28th, 2004 at 10:48 AM]