[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

I am joining this thread late in the game but I have the urge to throw my two cents into the discussion. Everything that I am writing applies equally to both NFHS and NCAA Men’s and Women’s, as well as FIBA rules.

First: The situation where three or four players from Team A are passing the ball among themselves while standing shoulder-to-shoulder, parallel to a boundary line, facing the boundary line, and within three feet of the boundary line is not even similar to the original play being discussed in this thread. This type of screening play does not have anything to do with the definitions of screening and obtaining (NFHS)/establishing (NCAA and FIBA) a legal guarding position found in Rule 4.

Second: The fact that the NCAA and FIBA rules require the same defender to closely guard the offensive player with the ball for the violation to occur while the NFHS does not does not change the ruling for the play being discussed in the original post.

Third: I would like to suggest to the officials that are of the opinion that the official was correct in the original play that they reread the definition of obtaining/establishing a legal guarding position. One will find that the definition of closely guarded will not be found within the definition of guarding. Closely guarded has its own section in Rule 4 and is intended to allow a defensive player to cause an offensive player who has control of a live ball to commit a floor violation. More importantly, a closely guarded situation cannot occur unless a defensive player first has obtained/established a legal guarding position and must maintain that legal guarding position.


Let’s look at two plays:

Play 1: Team A as the ball for a throw-in on the end line in its backcourt. A1 has possession of the ball. A2 is standing in bounds directly under Team B’s (NFHS/NCAA)/Team A’s (FIBA) basket waiting to receive the inbounds pass from A1. B2 is standing at the top of the key in Team A’s front court facing A1. A2 then receives the inbounds pass from A1. Has B2 obtained/established a legal guarding position against A2? Has B2 created a closely guarded situation to be in effect? YES; and NO.

Play 2: Same situation as in Play 1 but A3 is standing in between A2 and B2. Has B2 obtained/established a legal guarding position against A2? Has B2 created a closely guarded situation to be in effect? NO; and NO.


Play 2 shows us that B2 has not obtained/established a legal guarding position against A2 because of the screen by A3. Stat Man in his post of Nov. 07th at 12:22pm gives a very good analysis of how an official should be looking at this play. A1 has control of a live ball inbounds and is being closely guarded by B2. A2 then comes between A1 and B1. A2 has now set a screen for A1; therefore, by definition, B2 is no longer guarding A1.

[Edited by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. on Nov 8th, 2004 at 08:44 AM]