|
Three camps this summer. Various supervisors. On the floor, in the classroom, and in the bar their view was always the same. This is always a foul on the defense in scenario number 1. The defender was still moving and must get to a spot first. The dribbler cutting to the basket in this situation is entitled to do so without interference. Her normal running/dribbling movement never changed. When both the dribbler and the opponent are moving in the same path and direction the player behind is responsible for contact which results if the payer in front slows down, stops, or in this case changes direction. They also said that contact caused by a defensive player approaching a dribbler from behind is pushing. Theway it was explained was in these types of scenarios, the defender, who was still moving caused the contact by moving into the leg of the offensive player not the other way around no matter how it looked (i.e. her leg coming up and hitting the defender). Their reasoning being the defender was still moving. One even went so far as to say if they were observing a game where this happened and there was a no call, that crew would not like to hear what he had to say and might have a couple of days off. They did say it COULD BE a no call if the defender established and is in proper guarding position. That's not the case here because the offensive player was in front. They said it SHOULD BE a no call if the defender is stationary and the offensive player steps on the foot of the stationary defender and falls.
|