Quote:
Originally Posted by Scrapper1
1) It's not completely different. I've simply added a shooter, instead of a dribbler.
2)A1 dribbles toward the basket. A1 and B1 make slight or no contact. B1 falls backwards of his/her own volition. A1 becomes airborne to attempt a try. On returning to the floor, A1 trips over B1 who is now lying on the floor.
90% of the time, B1 has taken a defensive position (if you can call it that) under A1 after A1 has become airborne. This is not a legal position. If contact ensues that prevents A1 from landing normally, this is going to be a block.
3)Although, it could be a block if the defender takes that position on the floor without giving an offensive player without the ball time and distance to change direction.
|
1) Disagree. You've added an
airborne shooter. That's different than a "shooter. A shooter might still be on the floor when the initial contact/flop was made. No matter what, if the defender had a LGP or a legal position on the court either before or after A1 became airborne, the defender can still legally duck, turn or fall straight backwards. That's what we've been saying.
2) See my response to Camron. If B1 who is in A1's path had either a LGP or a legal position on the court and then fell straight backward from either incidental contact or trying to avoid contact, B1 is legally allowed to land on the court. That is a legal position. I can't think of any rule that says that it isn't under the described circumstances.
3) Yup, but in the OP, there is nothing that says the defender did
not have a legal position
before the incidental contact/flop. We've been answering on the assumption from the OP that B1 had either a LGP or a legal spot on the court.