![]() |
Legal Guarding Position
I came across NFHS Case Book scenario 10.6.1, Situation A with a result that I was not expecting. In the scenario, B1 is legally occupying a spot on the court before A1 jumps in the air to catch a pass. B1 then moves to a new spot (while A1 is airborne). A1 then lands on one foot and charges into B1. Foul on A1.
CB 10.6.1 Situation C has a scenario with airborne shooter A1 with language that says if B1 moves into the path of A1 after A1 has left the floor, the foul is on B1. Why the different results? I know that in Situation A, A1 is not a shooter, but NFHS Rules 4-23-4b and 4-23-5d seem to have the same language for establishing a legal guarding position on an airborne opponent with or without the ball - "the guard must have obtained legal position before the opponent left the floor." Not sure what I'm missing. Thanks. |
Because in the first situation he landed so he's no longer an Airborne player
Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk |
The first play, A1 came back to the floor. He was given a chance to land and then contacts B1.
The second play A1 never got a chance to get back to the floor and that is why it is a foul on B1. Again, go back and read what a legal B1 can do with an airborne player and what they cannot. There is your answer. ;) Peace |
Also note that in neither case is moving prohibited after the opponent is airborne. What is prohibited is moving INTO the path of an airborne opponent. That means a defender who is in the path of an opponent can legally continue to move....backwards, or even sideways. However, sideways movement, if the player was already in the path serves no useful purpose. Don't penalize a defender who legally gets in the path in time, but adjusts sideways for some reason when they would have been hit either way.
|
Thanks for the replies. I imagine the issue is figuring out what is exactly moving into the path of an airborne opponent. It seems pretty tough that A1 goes full speed for a layup, checks before he goes airborne that no B players are in front of him, lands with one (or two) feet and then because of his momentum immediately contacts B1 who established a court spot while A1 was airborne right in front of where he knew A1 was going to land and contact him - and then A1 gets called for a foul. A1 never would have had a chance to see B1.
|
Quote:
|
Makes sense when you focus on the fact that, by definition, A1 is not an airborne shooter after he returns to the floor. So he would be subject to the contact rules of any other player. So I see everyone's point. Is my thinking correct that if A1 made the shot, and the contact with B1 was after the ball went through the ring the ball would be dead so the contact (assuming it was not intentional or flagrant) could be ignored? Even if the contact couldn't be ignored, I assume the basket would count?
Thanks again, and appreciate the expertise. |
Quote:
Check out NF 4-19-1 NOTE and NF 5-1-2. |
Quote:
What would you do if an airborne shooter lands, then runs over a defender, then the ball goes through the basket. Let's assume the contact IS a foul. |
Quote:
Read the guarding and screening rules and note the difference between stationary and moving; with the ball and without; airborne shooter. |
Scenario in the OP is not an Airborne shooter. A1 jumped to catch a pass.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
No player or team is in control after the ball is in flight. So under NFHS Rule 6-7-7, Exception a., the ball is not dead until the try ends. Basket counts, then enforce the foul. |
Quote:
Peace |
Quote:
Interesting reference to the screening rules. Case Book scenario 10.6.1, Situation A did not talk about whether B1 had set a legal screen on a moving opponent without the ball (A1). In the Case Book Situation A, "A1 lands on one foot and then charges into B1." B1 certainly didn't seem to give A1 at least one stride as per 4-40-5. Presumably, the official would have to judge whether B1 "moving to a new spot" as in Situation A while A1 was airborne was or was not B1 setting a screen. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
If A1 has the ball, B1 just only get a legal position just before contact. If A2 does not have the ball, B1 must get a legal position allowing A1, if moving, 1 to 2 steps to avoid contact. In the case he's talking about where A1 lands with one foot down and immediately collides with B1, there are two possibilities.... 1. B1 obtains the position with A1 airborne but before A1 releases the ball. In that case, B1's position is judged based on the rules about guarding a player with the ball. 2. B1 obtains the position with A1 airborne but after A1 releases the ball. In that case, B1's position is judged based on the rules about guarding a player without the ball. A position by B1 that is legal doesn't become illegal by actions of A1 (releasing the ball). |
Quote:
Thanks again. |
Quote:
Hmm... what happens if A1 without the ball goes airborne, b1 then moves into the path (but beyond the landing spot), A1 receives the ball (making B1's position legal), A1 then passes the ball, lands on one foot and crashes into B1? |
Quote:
It's a play we can imagine, but not one we really see. |
Quote:
I think that B1 would be legal. Once A1 has the ball, the time & distance requirements are met making B1's position legal. A1 then giving up the ball doesn't negate a position that was legal. |
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:45pm. |