Quote:
Originally posted by eventnyc
I incorrectly thought that if the player was displaced there was a foul. However, the correct ruling (as evidenced by the above posts) regarding the screen is a "no call." Incidental contact may be severe. If the screener was in the visual field and contact results, foul.
The displacement language I was recalling, had to do with a player with the ball:
"A player who is screened within his/her visual field is expected to avoid contact by going around the screener. In cases of screens outside the visual field, the opponent may make inadvertent contact with the screener and if the opponent is running rapidly, the contact may be severe. Such a case is to be ruled as incidental contact provided the opponent stops or attempts to stop on contact and moves around the screen, and provided the screener is not displaced if he/she has the ball."
|
No, it's not automatically a no-call. Read the line after may be severe again.
[Edited by blindzebra on Feb 1st, 2005 at 12:10 PM]