Video Breakdown and Analysis (Video)

[JetMetFan]

But, and I agree with deecee on this, you may not know whether it "matters" at the moment it took place.

Take the play in the OP. Some have said illegal, some have said play on. Off of the screening activity B#21 ends up in an advantageous position: He's in the middle of the lane with inside position on the closest defender. The thrower didn't give him the ball because there was another defender in the way. Now, suppose the defender guarding the thrower was shading towards his - the defender's - left instead of the right? B#21 probably gets the ball and has a good scoring chance. It's going to be tough to put a whistle on an illegal screen at that point.

We can also look at the play the way it took place, but with a twist. B#21 winds up in an advantageous position but the ball goes to B#3 outside the 3-point arc. If B#3 catches the pass cleanly there's a chance he attempts a 3-point shot. If he shoots, B#21 has inside position for rebounding. Again, we can't always immediately know the ramifications of potentially illegal contact especially when it's off-ball contact.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by JetMetFan

But, and I agree with deecee on this, you may not know whether it "matters" at the moment it took place.

Take the play in the OP. Some have said illegal, some have said play on. Off of the screening activity B#21 ends up in an advantageous position: He's in the middle of the lane with inside position on the closest defender. The thrower didn't give him the ball because there was another defender in the way. Now, suppose the defender guarding the thrower was shading towards his - the defender's - left instead of the right? B#21 probably gets the ball and has a good scoring chance. It's going to be tough to put a whistle on an illegal screen at that point.

We can also look at the play the way it took place, but with a twist. B#21 winds up in an advantageous position but the ball goes to B#3 outside the 3-point arc. If B#3 catches the pass cleanly there's a chance he attempts a 3-point shot. If he shoots, B#21 has inside position for rebounding. Again, we can't always immediately know the ramifications of potentially illegal contact especially when it's off-ball contact.

By that line of reasoning, there is no such thing as incidental contact away from the ball (or even perhaps on the ball) since you can't know how the subsequent events will unfold. Any bump, push, hold, etc. would need to be called.

Sometimes, if the advantage takes too long to develop, you just get it wrong. I consider that better than calling fouls on situations that rarely lead to an actual advantage just because there was contact that could be an advantage in a few cases.

[deecee]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

By that line of reasoning, there is no such thing as incidental contact away from the ball (or even perhaps on the ball) since you can't know how the subsequent events will unfold. Any bump, push, hold, etc. would need to be called.

Sometimes, if the advantage takes too long to develop, you just get it wrong. I consider that better than calling fouls on situations that rarely lead to an actual advantage just because there was contact that could be an advantage in a few cases.

The only difference is that this contact wasn't incidental. It was a deliberate action to set a screen to help the offensive player evade his defender. This was accomplished. In plays with the ball handler start-develop-finish is possible as contact with the ball handler can be observed while letting the action play out and seeing the immediate effect of the contact.

In contact away from the ball start-develop-finish should not apply as this methodology does not work here. Plays most often start on ball, they may develop off ball, but by the time the repercussions are realized (finish) for any off ball activity it is to late.

If the offensive player runs off the screen and then fades to the corner, or back out then I can see an argument for passing (and I would probably be in the camp for passing). But the player curls right into the paint. I'm not going to put much more thought into what ifs and what may, I'm blowing the whistle and moving on.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by deecee

The only difference is that this contact wasn't incidental. It was a deliberate action to set a screen to help the offensive player evade his defender. This was accomplished. In plays with the ball handler start-develop-finish is possible as contact with the ball handler can be observed while letting the action play out and seeing the immediate effect of the contact.

In contact away from the ball start-develop-finish should not apply as this methodology does not work here. Plays most often start on ball, they may develop off ball, but by the time the repercussions are realized (finish) for any off ball activity it is to late.

If the offensive player runs off the screen and then fades to the corner, or back out then I can see an argument for passing (and I would probably be in the camp for passing). But the player curls right into the paint. I'm not going to put much more thought into what ifs and what may, I'm blowing the whistle and moving on.

I can buy that, but do we not pass on lots of off ball contact that could, by rule, be judged to be a foul?

[deecee]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

I can buy that, but do we not pass on lots of off ball contact that could, by rule, be judged to be a foul?

We do and it would depend on what the immediate result/advantage was for sure. Off ball contact has a different threshold for advantage/disadvantage and what would be considered "callable".

I try and determine how much was the offended player's freedom of movement impacted, and the severity of the contact. Still makes off ball calls rare IMO and in my experience. Most common ones are illegal screen activity and illegally bumping/checking/holding cutters through the lane.

[Kansas Ref]

Originally Posted by deecee

We do and it would depend on what the immediate result/advantage was for sure. Off ball contact has a different threshold for advantage/disadvantage and what would be considered "callable".

I try and determine how much was the offended player's freedom of movement impacted, and the severity of the contact. Still makes off ball calls rare IMO and in my experience. Most common ones are illegal screen activity and illegally bumping/checking/holding cutters through the lane.

*well stated indeed with regard to the "different threshold for callable" that we invoke towatrds off-ball activity--in most cases such action must be glaringly obstrusive.