Quote:
Originally Posted by OHBBREF
yep
A1 driving to the basket B1 is running parralell to A1 haveing never establish LGP, A1 changes direction toward B1 and lowers shoulder to initiate contact and go through B1 to get to the basket.
PC foul and we go the other way.
|
Hmm, actually B1 could have LGP in this particular case.
Perhaps a better example would A1 driving to the basket, B2 is guarding A2 on the post, and B2's back is to A1. As A1 drives past B2, A1 gives a little forearm to B2's back to creat a little more space. (Snaqs has more examples.)
Anyway, we agree the offense can commit a player-control foul against a defender who does not have LGP.
This leads us back to the question of the stationary defender with the foot on the line. My whole point is the case play tells us the defender does not have LGP, due to the foot being on the line. It does not say the defender has "illegal position", and it does not say the defender is responsible for all contact because they are OOB. There have been no specific rules citations to back up any of those comments. So, all other things being equal, my point (and a couple others here), say there can be a situation where A1 can be called for the player-control foul, even though B1's foot is on the line OOB.
Do you follow the logic?