The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jun 21, 2016, 05:24pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 50
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.
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jun 21, 2016, 05:26pm
Courageous When Prudent
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Hampton Roads, VA
Posts: 13,601
Because in the first situation he landed so he's no longer an Airborne player

Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk
__________________
A-hole formerly known as BNR
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jun 21, 2016, 05:28pm
Do not give a damn!!
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: On the border
Posts: 29,029
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
__________________
"When the phone does not ring, the assignor is calling."
--Black

Charles Michael “Mick” Chambers (1947-2010)
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jun 21, 2016, 05:37pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: In the offseason.
Posts: 11,871
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.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jun 21, 2016, 06:26pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 50
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.
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jun 21, 2016, 07:15pm
I got a Basketball Jones!
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Hunger
Posts: 915
Quote:
Originally Posted by requintero View Post
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.
Sorry, the issue is figuring out the definition of airborne shooter. Once you grasp that simple concept, the other questions answer themselves.
__________________
Lah me..
(In honor of Jurassic Ref, R.I.P.)
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jun 21, 2016, 08:42pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 50
Wink

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.

Last edited by RefBob; Tue Jun 21, 2016 at 09:04pm.
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jun 22, 2016, 04:59am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: West Orange, NJ
Posts: 2,583
Quote:
Originally Posted by requintero View Post
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.
My turn.

Check out NF 4-19-1 NOTE and NF 5-1-2.
__________________
"Everyone has a purpose in life, even if it's only to serve as a bad example."
"If Opportunity knocks and he's not home, Opportunity waits..."
"Don't you have to be stupid somewhere else?" "Not until 4."
"The NCAA created this mess, so let them live with it." (JRutledge)
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jun 22, 2016, 07:55am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 3,505
Quote:
Originally Posted by requintero View Post
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.
IF there is contact after a made basket why would you ever cancel the score?

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.
__________________
in OS I trust
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jun 22, 2016, 08:23am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 17,224
Quote:
Originally Posted by requintero View Post
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.
A1 would NOT be called for a foul in this situation. A1 no longer has the ball -- so the guarding rules on "a moving player with the ball" don't apply.

Read the guarding and screening rules and note the difference between stationary and moving; with the ball and without; airborne shooter.
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jun 22, 2016, 10:09am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: NB/PEI, Canada
Posts: 776
Scenario in the OP is not an Airborne shooter. A1 jumped to catch a pass.
__________________
Coach: Hey ref I'll make sure you can get out of here right after the game!

Me: Thanks, but why the big rush.

Coach: Oh I thought you must have a big date . . .we're not the only ones your planning on F$%&ing tonite are we!
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jun 22, 2016, 12:01pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: In the offseason.
Posts: 11,871
Quote:
Originally Posted by requintero View Post
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.
A1 sure had a chance to see B1. B1 didn't just pop up out of nowhere. Only if A1 was driving with his eyes closed would A1 not be able to see the defenders that were close enough to be relevant. A1 could have determined that B1 would be able to get into a position to draw a foul and could have made a different choice.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jun 22, 2016, 12:04pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by JetMetFan View Post
My turn.

Check out NF 4-19-1 NOTE and NF 5-1-2.
These references are helpful. A1 is not an airborne shooter at the time of the contact with B1. Therefore, A1's contact with B1 is not a player control foul. The basket counts and the ball is dead when A1's shot went through the basket. No foul on A1's contact with B1 after the ball is dead unless intentional or flagrant. Different result if A1 missed the shot and the ball was still live. Then you would have to assess A1's contact on B1 as in any contact scenario.
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jun 22, 2016, 12:13pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by deecee View Post
IF there is contact after a made basket why would you ever cancel the score?



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.
You're right you wouldn't. Unless there was a player control foul as per NFHS Rule 5-2, which was not the case here.

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.
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jun 22, 2016, 12:16pm
Do not give a damn!!
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: On the border
Posts: 29,029
Quote:
Originally Posted by requintero View Post
These references are helpful. A1 is not an airborne shooter at the time of the contact with B1. Therefore, A1's contact with B1 is not a player control foul. The basket counts and the ball is dead when A1's shot went through the basket. No foul on A1's contact with B1 after the ball is dead unless intentional or flagrant. Different result if A1 missed the shot and the ball was still live. Then you would have to assess A1's contact on B1 as in any contact scenario.
This might be different than your play as well because the ball did not have to go in at all and the play is still live (Sorry I do not have my casebook with me to read the reference). If that is the case, this is still a live ball foul and not a PC foul as well. So the basket would count if all this happen while the ball was not in the basket yet. Again the major mistake I see you making is assuming there is some rule that suggests that B1 is not in a legal position. B1 never has to get out of the way of a shooter or a player just returning to the floor when they have gotten to their spot legally and maintained their legal position.

Peace
__________________
"When the phone does not ring, the assignor is calling."
--Black

Charles Michael “Mick” Chambers (1947-2010)
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Legal Guarding Position The_Rookie Basketball 16 Sat Oct 11, 2014 11:18pm
Legal guarding position? AremRed Basketball 7 Thu Apr 18, 2013 01:50am
Legal Guarding Position MatthewPV Basketball 8 Sat Jan 24, 2009 06:04pm
legal guarding position Dbyb Basketball 37 Fri Mar 26, 2004 01:50pm
legal guarding position John Schaefferkoetter Basketball 28 Sat Nov 08, 2003 10:14pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:10am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1