(Video) Legal or Illegal Screen

[JRutledge]

I want opinions on this. This is not my video BTW, just subscribe to the page and noticed this.

Peace

[bainsey]

Legal. Plenty of distance between screener and defender when the screener established position.

[BillyMac]

Legal. The screener appeared to meet all the time, and distance, parameters to make this a violent, but legal, blind screen on a moving opponent.

4-40-5: When screening a moving opponent, the screener must allow the
opponent time and distance to avoid contact by stopping or changing direction.
The speed of the player to be screened will determine where the screener may
take his/her stationary position. The position will vary and may be one to two
normal steps or strides from the opponent.

Nice video JRutledge. Thanks for sharing.

[Rich]

Legal.

[Dad]

I'm fine with an illegal screen here. There's no way the defense has time to stop and change directions when the player actually becomes a screener. By the time he stops, the defender barely has room to take a step, let alone two which should be given when a player is running.

I'm probably never calling this illegal, but I do not think it's an easy call if you're going off the rule.

[TimTaylor]

Legal.

The screener meets the requirements of 4-40-5.

Clearly plenty of room as the defender takes two strides before he makes contact with the screener.

[OKREF]

Legal. Time and distance requirements met.

[Dad]

Originally Posted by TimTaylor

Legal.

The screener meets the requirements of 4-40-5.

Clearly plenty of room as the defender takes two strides before he makes contact with the screener.

This doesn't matter. You can't jump in front of someone who has taken two strides and claim two strides. Defender is pushing off his left foot when the screen is set. He slams into it on his right foot.

Illegal, I think the screener comes to a complete stop right before contact, which is not enough time/distance for how fast the defender is moving. Plus it's a bullshit play in the backcourt and I want to clean that up.

[TimTaylor]

Originally Posted by Dad

This doesn't matter. You can't jump in front of someone who has taken two strides and claim two strides. Defender is pushing off his left foot when the screen is set. He slams into it on his right foot.

You're wrong. The screener's feet were set before the defender's left foot hit the floor.

And as Cameron pointed out, the screener was in fact moving (backwards) in the same path & direction as the defender before he set the screen.

[Camron Rust]

Legal by a mile.

For a moment before the screener stooped, they screener was moving in the same path and direction as the opponent, so that made it legal by an even greater margin than it may first appear.

[Dad]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Legal by a mile.

For a moment before the screener stooped, they screener was moving in the same path and direction as the opponent, so that made it legal by an even greater margin than it may first appear.

They were never moving in the same path and direction. (Before contact)

[BlueDevilRef]

Ugly/clumsy/hard contact is not an automatic violation or foul. This is just a hard screen in the backcourt.

Only "foul" here was the defenders teammates not calling out the pick.


I wish I had a cool signature

[Raymond]

He doesn't have to be vertical when the strides start, just in the path. At time of contact he was legal: at the spot first and within his cylinder.

Sent from my SPH-L900 using Tapatalk