Video Request: Illegal Screen or Block?

[ballgame99]

This must be a point of emphasis in the college game this year? There were several of these dribble hand-offs called illegal screens last night in the Missouri game. One in particular looked pretty innocent, which is what makes me think the officials have been told to look for this type of contact.

[bob jenkins]

There is also a recent posting / video on the NCAAW site of a nearly identical play.

I had to laugh at the announcer on the OP game -- "you can't be screening when you have the ball"

[reffish]

You can pick to screen, but you can't roll to screen.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by reffish

You can pick to screen, but you can't roll to screen.

I don't think that's quite the saying you are looking for.

[crosscountry55]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

I had to laugh at the announcer on the OP game -- "you can't be screening when you have the ball"

Yeah, that made me chuckle as well. Actually it made me kinda mad.

In fact the only part of the screening rule that has anything to do with the screener having the ball is that little caveat about a screen outside of the visual field when the screener doesn't give a normal step distance; should contact then occur, it is incidental provided the screener isn't displaced if he/she has the ball. In other words, screener or not, you can't displace a ball handler. Obviously that is NOT the situation in the OP.

[hoopsaddict]

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by ballgame99

This must be a point of emphasis in the college game this year? There were several of these dribble hand-offs called illegal screens last night in the Missouri game. One in particular looked pretty innocent, which is what makes me think the officials have been told to look for this type of contact.

It was a POE a couple of years ago.

[deecee]

Originally Posted by ballgame99

This must be a point of emphasis in the college game this year? There were several of these dribble hand-offs called illegal screens last night in the Missouri game. One in particular looked pretty innocent, which is what makes me think the officials have been told to look for this type of contact.

It was hammered at us at the 2 college camps I went to this past summer. Not just this type of player behavior but also when the screener rolls to the basket with the second defender going under the screen then getting driven down (and in most cases forcing a switch) with the screener. It was made clear that if the screener rolls the defender MUST be either sealed on his back but NOT in between him and the basket.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by deecee

It was hammered at us at the 2 college camps I went to this past summer. Not just this type of player behavior but also when the screener rolls to the basket with the second defender going under the screen then getting driven down (and in most cases forcing a switch) with the screener. It was made clear that if the screener rolls the defender MUST be either sealed on his back but NOT in between him and the basket.

If there is contact with rolling player that creates an advantage by keeping the defender from going below the screen, it is and always has been illegal. It isn't any different than the screener stepping higher to ensure the defender can't go over the screen. The fact that the player intends to roll to the basket doesn't absolve them from meeting the requirement of setting a legal screen.....the most relevant of which is that he screener must be stationary unless they're moving the the same path/direction.

I've always called it that way but many haven't.

Essentially, they have to start the roll before the defender goes under so that the defender is following them instead. Once the defender goes under, the likelihood of an illegal screen is much higher of the player rolls into them.

[deecee]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

I've always called it that way but many haven't.

This was the sentimentality that they were trying to get through to all attendees at the camps. MAKE THIS CALL.

[IUgrad92]

Would like to see more opinions on the actual play in the OP. A1 appears to be dribbling in a set path and there is contact with a defender that does not have LGP.

Did T anticipate the hand-off that ended up not occurring?

[deecee]

Originally Posted by IUgrad92

Would like to see more opinions on the actual play in the OP. A1 appears to be dribbling in a set path and there is contact with a defender that does not have LGP.

Did T anticipate the hand-off that ended up not occurring?

The play was called correctly. The offensive player cannot just make a beeline for a defensive player (especially one that is guarding someone else) and just make arbitrary contact.

LGP has nothing to do with an illegal screen call (and in this case the defender had LGP on the player he was guarding). LGP has to do with block/charge situations, which this is not. The contact was an easy foul call on the ball handler and it was not a PC foul but an illegal screen foul.

What I would like to know is what the conversation was between the coach and the new T.

[WhistlesAndStripes]

I can already tell this is gonna be a good one.

[IUgrad92]

Originally Posted by deecee

The play was called correctly. The offensive player cannot just make a beeline for a defensive player (especially one that is guarding someone else) and just make arbitrary contact.

LGP has nothing to do with an illegal screen call (and in this case the defender had LGP on the player he was guarding). LGP has to do with block/charge situations, which this is not. The contact was an easy foul call on the ball handler and it was not a PC foul but an illegal screen foul.

What I would like to know is what the conversation was between the coach and the new T.

How do you make a beeline towards a moving object, yet at the same time continue in your initial path? Was he not just as likely making a 'beeline' to his teammate as he was the defensive player? There are many offensive sets that involve handing the ball off. If the defensive player decides to 'go over the top' instead of behind the hand-off, it makes the actual hand-off more risky and potentially causing the offensive player with the ball to disengage from attempting to hand the ball off.

I'm not saying this was called correctly or incorrectly, but I'm not seeing too many opinions siding one way, which leads me to believe this is not as cut and dry as you seem to make it.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by IUgrad92

How do you make a beeline towards a moving object, yet at the same time continue in your initial path? Was he not just as likely making a 'beeline' to his teammate as he was the defensive player? There are many offensive sets that involve handing the ball off. If the defensive player decides to 'go over the top' instead of behind the hand-off, it makes the actual hand-off more risky and potentially causing the offensive player with the ball to disengage from attempting to hand the ball off.

I'm not saying this was called correctly or incorrectly, but I'm not seeing too many opinions siding one way, which leads me to believe this is not as cut and dry as you seem to make it.

If A1, who has someone guarding him, is making a beeline towards a teammate who has someone guarding him then A1 is settig a screen or receiving a screen. The subsequent contact between A1/B2 or A2/B1 falls under screening rules and principles.

NCAA refs, as has been mentioned a couple times, are supposed to be on the lookout for A1 setting up these illegal screens. A1 is not accidentally ending up in B2's path.


Sent from my SPH-L900 using Tapatalk