Quote:
Originally Posted by Snaqwells
LGP is not always required for a PC foul.
|
True, there's always OSL (outstretched limb), but I don't believe that's applicable here.
Quote:
|
10-6-9 says nothing about LGP, it says "legal defensive position." IOW, LGP not required.
|
Very well. We have a definition for LGP. Do we have a definition for LDP? If not, I'd have to think they're synonymous.
Quote:
|
4-40-6 says nothing about facing the same direction. you can't just make up your own interpretation by adding words that aren't there. It says nothing about neither player being the ball handler, either.
|
Yes, I mentioned that about the ball handler. The only time I've had 4-40-6 in a discussion was regarding both players facing the same direction. As for "adding words," that's actually been my point about 4-23-3c, that "straight back" cannot be added to "laterally" and "obliquely."
Quote:
|
So, assuming (for the sake of argument) B1 loses LGP every time he lefts [sic] a foot and moves it backwards, he gains it again everytime that foot touches the floor.
|
Also true. That does indeed answer my "straight back, how?" question to a degree. We just don't know from the OP whether the backtracking defender had LGP.
Quote:
|
Finally, do you really think it's the intent of the rules to allow an offensive player to run over a retreating defender just because he's not facing the same direction?
|
In most cases, yes. If the defender is retreating, he is not legally guarding the dribbler, so the defender needs to either obtain LGP, or get out of the way.
Now, that doesn't give the dribbler the right to stiff-arm or elbow anyone out of the way. (10-6-7) I use a three-step process for determining block/charge at the point of contact:
1. Is the contact incidental? If yes, no whistle. If no, go to step 2.
2. Did the offensive player make contact using an out-stretched limb (OSL)? If yes, PC. If no, go to step 3.
3. Did the defensive player have LGP? If yes, PC. If no, block.