View Single Post
  #50 (permalink)  
Old Tue May 13, 2014, 02:36pm
jeremy341a jeremy341a is offline
Often wrong never n doubt
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 737
Quote:
Originally Posted by JetMetFan View Post
On play #4 you can contend the defender actually made it to the "spot" (in the air) first. I can see calling the foul on the defender if he jumped toward the shooter, but he didn't. If he did the shooter would've fallen backwards. Now, I might be more sensitive to the head contact with younger players but with older BV players probably not. It would be considered more "the price of doing business" against a player who is nearly a foot taller. My attitude towards the head contact in NCAAW/GV (for me) game would be different but that's because we've been told how to handle those situations.



I completely understand why no fouls were called on the screens by Ginóbili and Splitter, especially when remembering this past season's NCAAW breakout video on screening. The part of the rule D. Williamson really emphasized when talking about screens was did the screener "contact and delay" the opponent. Ginóbili and Splitter (#1) made contact on Allen but didn't delay him from getting where he wanted to go. Splitter's second screen did both, though not initially, but Allen stopped trying to get around it. If he keeps making the attempt then there's a chance Splitter is called for a foul.

I don't think you can say the defender beat him into the spot as he most definitely moved into his path after he began his upward motion. He would have only fallen backwards if the defender was in front of him to begin with.

I am not including the contact to the head as to why I believe this is a foul. However I would like to hear why you feel that it should not be one.

Last edited by jeremy341a; Tue May 13, 2014 at 02:38pm.
Reply With Quote