Two Block/Charge Plays (Video)

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by AremRed

B1 didn't do anything to lose LGP on his end (move forward, etc.) but A1's path is now backward, which means that B1 is no longer "by definition" guarding A1.

Oh course this argument is pointless cuz we don't care whether B1 is legal until contact occurs.

A1's path can also be considered to be the line between A1 and the basket.

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

A1's path can also be considered to be the line between A1 and the basket.

Is that supported by any rule or case play or by the dictionary definition of the word "path"?

As I said, this line of reasoning is pointless anyway.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by AremRed

Is that supported by any rule or case play or by the dictionary definition of the word "path"?

As I said, this line of reasoning is pointless anyway.

Path isn't defined in the rule book as far as I know. I believe it to mean both the line in which a player is moving AND the line in between a player and where they want to go (the basket).

The case plays largely talk about path as the direction a player is actually moving.

However, imagine a stationary A1 and a stationary B1 where A1 fakes B1 into the air such that B1 jumps perfectly straight up. A1 then, after A1 is airborne, moves into B1. Did B1 have LGP? Why or why not? Was B1 entitled to verticality (noting that verticality only is granted with LGP)?

Alternately, imagine A1 moving across the top of the key with B1 sliding across the top of the key as well. B1 had two feet down momentarily and remains between A1 and the basket but is never in the path A1 is traveling. A1 suddenly changes direction towards the basket contacting B1's chect while B1 still had one foot off the floor. LGP or not?