Throw-in question

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Big Cat:

And you would be wrong. You would be attempting to apply a rule that does not exist.

MTD, Sr.

I dont think i'm wrong. IF a player tries to take up a ton of room by spreading his legs out and another player wants part of the space i will make him take normal stance. we have example in screen rule about what proper stance looks like. also, verticality, rebounding defintions. i think my interpretation is reasonable.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by BigCat

I dont think i'm wrong. IF a player tries to take up a ton of room by spreading his legs out and another player wants part of the space i will make him take normal stance. we have example in screen rule about what proper stance looks like. also, verticality, rebounding defintions. i think my interpretation is reasonable.

Big Cat:

You are trying to apply the Screening Rule to a non-screening situation. Stop trying to apply a rule that does NOT exist.

MTD, Sr.

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Big Cat:

You are trying to apply the Screening Rule to a non-screening situation. Stop trying to apply a rule that does NOT exist.

MTD, Sr.

I'm reading the rules as a whole. Screening, verticality, rebounding....when you read them as a whole you get a picture of what a legal stance is or isnt. Again, if a player spreads his legs way wide just to take up more space and another player wants part of it then i will make the player adjust.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by BigCat

I'm reading the rules as a whole. Screening, verticality, rebounding....when you read them as a whole you get a picture of what a legal stance is or isnt. Again, if a player spreads his legs way wide just to take up more space and another player wants part of it then i will make the player adjust.

Big Cat:

What part of the rules do you not understand? This is not a screening situation. You canNOT apply the screening rule to a non-screening situation. I know I am a bald old geezer but you need to listen when this bald old geezer speaks.

MTD, Sr.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

This is not a screening situation.

Why not? Screening is defined as action by a player who, without causing contact, delays, or prevents an opponent from reaching a desired position, like a desired position on the jump ball circle.

A nonjumper wanting a desired spot on the jump ball circle certainly falls under the screening definition. Said player wants the desired spot, and wants to prevent an opponent from taking that desired spot.

[just another ref]

The reason this isn't about screening is because this jockeying for position is taking place before the ball is live. I don't think you're going to call contact with this guy who happens to be standing with his legs spread wide intentional or flagrant, are you?

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Big Cat:

You are trying to apply the Screening Rule to a non-screening situation. Stop trying to apply a rule that does NOT exist.

MTD, Sr.

Mark, let me ask you this. Suppose two team B players are in adjacent positions around the circle. we know if team A desires in between they are entitled to it. How much room would you give A to get between the B players. 6 inches...6 feet? i bet youd tell the B players to separate enough so that the A player could get in with a normal stance, shoulder width etc...

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by BigCat

Mark, let me ask you this. Suppose two team B players are in adjacent positions around the circle. we know if team A desires in between they are entitled to it. How much room would you give A to get between the B players. 6 inches...6 feet? i bet youd tell the B players to separate enough so that the A player could get in with a normal stance, shoulder width etc...

Big Cat:

Yes. But what is your point with regard to the original situation that we are discussing?

MTD, Sr.

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Big Cat:

Yes. But what is your point with regard to the original situation that we are discussing?

MTD, Sr.

you are defining what a reasonable amount of space is when you separate them so a player can get in between. to allow any player to spread his legs on the circle as wide as he can, just because he gets there first, isnt consistent with rules as a whole. Screening, verticality etc.

I will always "listen" to what you say. I wont always agree. I dont here if you would allow a player to spread his legs way wide etc. and an opponent wanted in.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BigCat

Suppose two team B players are in adjacent positions around the circle. We know if team A desires in between they are entitled to it. How much room would you give A to get between the B players. 6 inches...6 feet? I bet you'd tell the B players to separate enough so that the A player could get in with a normal stance, shoulder width etc...

Agree, but what is the rule basis for this interpretation, if it really doesn't involve screening?

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Agree, but what is the rule basis for this interpretation, if it really doesn't involve screening?

what i have said is that, although the rules dont specifically provide a width for non jumpers on the circle, i do not believe that it is unlimited. just as i dont believe that separating two b players on the circle by only 6 to 8 inches would be enough. Mark agreed, and i think most would, that we would make the B players separate enough that A could take a normal stance. i dont think any of us would separate the B players so that A could spread his legs way wide.

What is considered a normal stance? we see examples in the screening rule--shoulder width...we know in verticality player stays in their cylinder etc. when a player is rebounding he cant stick arms or legs out abnormally. these are examples of players in proper positions. i think it is reasonable to interpret the width for non jumpers as a normal stance for that player.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BigCat

what i have said is that, although the rules dont specifically provide a width for non jumpers on the circle, i do not believe that it is unlimited. just as i dont believe that separating two b players on the circle by only 6 to 8 inches would be enough. Mark agreed, and i think most would, that we would make the B players separate enough that A could take a normal stance. i dont think any of us would separate the B players so that A could spread his legs way wide.

What is considered a normal stance? we see examples in the screening rule--shoulder width...we know in verticality player stays in their cylinder etc. when a player is rebounding he cant stick arms or legs out abnormally. these are examples of players in proper positions. i think it is reasonable to interpret the width for non jumpers as a normal stance for that player.

If a player gets to the circle first and takes up that space by spreading his legs, he is doing nothing illegal. If you make him pull his right leg in, what's preventing him from spreading his left leg out to create the same stance?

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

If a player gets to the circle first and takes up that space by spreading his legs, he is doing nothing illegal. If you make him pull his right leg in, what's preventing him from spreading his left leg out to create the same stance?

if he is spread wayy wide and another player wants a spot i will tell him to take a normal stance. He will decide which leg he pulls in. if there is no one on the side of him he can do what he wants.

i've not seen anyone so spread out in 30 years that would make me say anything.