[quote=ronny mulkey]
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee
JR,
You always make sense to me BUT I am hung up on the verbage that allows severe contact and displacement which makes these following plays hard to judge. Assume the screenee did not lower shoulder or push through:
1. Screener is knocked down and screenee is standing and stopped. They go around the screener.
2. Screener is knocked down and screenee falls down beside screener, gets up and goes around screener.
3. screener is knocked down, screenee goes down on top of screener, rolls clear, gets up and goes around screener.
4. screener is knocked down, screenee STUMBLES over screener and keeps going.
Mulk
|
No call in #1. A screener's purpose is to sacrifice their body (if necessary) to force the defender to take a longer path around.
No call in #2 unless the screen was not legal.
No call in #3. Again, the screen served it's purpose.
Foul in #4. The screenee proceeded right through the screen by use of contact that knocked the screener out of the way.
For number 1, 2, and 3, the assumption is that the screenee didn't see the screen in time to stop. If they saw the screen in time to stop or divert but still plowed into the screen, it would be a foul in most cases....not based on the advantage but to keep the game from getting too rough.