SMU @ Cincinnati Plays

[BryanV21]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

I have no idea what your point is. It's a push, in this case an illegal screen also. Who said it wasn't a push?

The point is you can possibly call a push BEFORE the screen even happens.

Sent from my SM-G925V using Tapatalk

[Rich]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

The point is you can possibly call a push BEFORE the screen even happens.

Sent from my SM-G925V using Tapatalk

The push *is* the screen. That's all screening activity.

[Remington]

Anyone else notice the Trail coming in with a foul on play #1? He has to be 10 feet behind the half line when he makes the call. I found that a VERY large stretch. It would have looked quite silly had the C or L not had a whistle on that play as it was nowhere near a "whale" type call.

[BryanV21]

Originally Posted by Rich

The push *is* the screen. That's all screening activity.

If the dribbler goes the other way I'm calling a push.

Sent from my SM-G925V using Tapatalk

[Rich]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

If the dribbler goes the other way I'm calling a push.

Sent from my SM-G925V using Tapatalk

You're calling a team control foul either way. What's the difference?

It's an unnecessary distinction.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

If the dribbler goes the other way I'm calling a push.

Sent from my SM-G925V using Tapatalk

How is that any different than how you would report if it was done as part of an illegal screen?

[frezer11]

For play #4, there is no way it is a foul on the defender, I think we're all in agreement on that, but is it a travel? Looks to me like the defender falls while dribbling, then grabs the ball on his butt, then passes. This happens to me a few times a season where a ball handler keeps his dribble during the fall, and passes to a teammate. I think they should've played on there.

[BryanV21]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

How is that any different than how you would report if it was done as part of an illegal screen?

I'm not giving the illegal screen signal nor am I actually saying "illegal screen". I'm giving the push signal and saying "push".

Do you use the traveling signal for a carry or other violation?

Sent from my SM-G925V using Tapatalk

[jpgc99]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

I'm not giving the illegal screen signal nor am I actually saying "illegal screen". I'm giving the push signal and saying "push".

Do you use the traveling signal for a carry or other violation?

Sent from my SM-G925V using Tapatalk

My prelim either way is going to be a TC punch. At the table I'll show what he did. As others have said, the push IS the illegal screen. Not all illegal screens are blocking fouls. Some are holds, some are pushes, some are chucks.

[BryanV21]

Originally Posted by jpgc99

My prelim either way is going to be a TC punch. At the table I'll show what he did. As others have said, the push IS the illegal screen. Not all illegal screens are blocking fouls. Some are holds, some are pushes, some are chucks.

You guys are really taking this far.

You can have a push and then another foul. Like I said... If you deem the push to be the illegal screen that's fine, but I can see a push before the word "screen" even enters my head.

Sent from my SM-G925V using Tapatalk

[Rich]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

I'm not giving the illegal screen signal nor am I actually saying "illegal screen". I'm giving the push signal and saying "push".

Do you use the traveling signal for a carry or other violation?

Sent from my SM-G925V using Tapatalk

What is an "illegal screen signal?"

The signal is a team control foul -- it doesn't matter if it's a screen, a push, or whatever.

[BryanV21]

Originally Posted by Rich

What is an "illegal screen signal?"

The signal is a team control foul -- it doesn't matter if it's a screen, a push, or whatever.

You can have a pushing foul in and of itself. It doesn't have to be part of an illegal screen.

Btw, there IS an illegal screen signal... It's the same as a blocking signal.

What is the problem here. Are you guys so set on calling me an idiot that you can't think otherwise?

Sent from my SM-G925V using Tapatalk

[BryanV21]

Originally Posted by Rich

You're calling a team control foul either way. What's the difference?

It's an unnecessary distinction.

Seriously? That's like saying that a shooting foul is a shooting foul, and there's no need to say whether it was a push, block, illegal contact, etc. I guess all the different signals in the rule book are just to fill space. Not to mention the definitions for each.

Sent from my SM-G925V using Tapatalk

[Rich]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

You can have a pushing foul in and of itself. It doesn't have to be part of an illegal screen.

Btw, there IS an illegal screen signal... It's the same as a blocking signal.

What is the problem here. Are you guys so set on calling me an idiot that you can't think otherwise?

Sent from my SM-G925V using Tapatalk

They're your words putting images in our heads.

There is no such thing as an "illegal screen signal" in the NFHS book. No. Such. Thing. The signal chart does not say "illegal screen" anywhere.

The correct signal is the team control foul signal, unless your location has decided to use other signals in lieu of or in addition to that signal. I would be using the "team control foul" signal, both at the spot and at the table.

But if you are using signal 34 on an illegal screen, it's still a blocking foul no matter what you are calling it.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

Seriously? That's like saying that a shooting foul is a shooting foul, and there's no need to say whether it was a push, block, illegal contact, etc. I guess all the different signals in the rule book are just to fill space. Not to mention the definitions for each.

Sent from my SM-G925V using Tapatalk

Some people (you in this case) just like to argue even though they are factually incorrect. This conversation needs to be put on hold until you tell us the signal # that's listed as an illegal screen.