Quote:
Originally posted by Jurassic Referee
Anyhoo....iow, when you apply these screening principles to A1, B2 is now illegally guarding A1 by (1)not giving A1 a full step when B1 set up behind A1 and outside her vision, and(2)never obtaining an initial legal guarding position(she's turned t'other way). Now, if B2 was more than a step away, then A1 would be responsible for the contact. In that case, B2 wasn't facing A1- so she isn't guarding or screening. However, she does have a right to her legal position on the court, so A1 is responsible for any contact that occurs.
|
This doesn't make it more simple, though. What if B2 is just standing there under the basket picking her nose with her back to A1? Not trying to guard, not trying to screen, not even keeping track of who is where? If A1 backs to a stop just short of contact, waits a minute, and then tries to take off backwards, there's no one step of space, but B2 can hardly be held responsible of the contact, can she? She has a right to her space on the floor even though it's less than one step away from A1.
Quote:
Originally posted by Jurassic Referee
Casebook play 10.6.2SitB says that screening principles do apply to offensive players also- "Screening principles apply to the dribbler who attempts to cut off an opponent who is approaching in a different path from the rear.". Note that it says "principles", but doesn't actually label the dribbler's action a "screen", by definition.
|
I thought your point has been that screening is what you call it when it's done by the offense. So now why say that it just barely applies to the dribbler? Why wouldn't it apply to the dribbler?
None of this means that I think you're wrong, I just don't understand.