Once more, the question of a legal guarding position

[Camron Rust]

Originally posted by Damian
I know we talked about this earlier. I just got me new rule book. The exact words indicate that the defender must have both feet touching the playing court to establish a legal guarding position. Originally, I thought that it would say that both feet must be completely in the playing court.

So, if I read this right, a defender has established a legal guarding position if one or both feet are on the out of bounds line providing that at least a part of each is in bounds.

How do you plan to call this?

Thanks,
dd

I agree with your reading of this and think it it the most sensible interpretation if we are going to change the rule on LGP with regards to in-bounds/OOB.

However, the NF, in it's always consistent and quality rulewriting, has released a comment/interpretation that is contrary to what is actually written in the rule.

The interpretation says not only that the feet must be entirely inbounds but that it applys to maintaining position in addition to obtaining the LGP.

IMHO, this interpretation is just plain silly. LGP should not depending on absolute location. If a player gets plowed over in the chest, a change of position latarally of 1-2 inches is not what made it happen.