VCU / George Washington - Legal/Illegal Screen?

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by johnny d

The rule book does not define outside the visual field as being behind, to the side, or in front. Nor does the rule state that it is the person being screened responsibility to look for screens that are set outside of his visual field. If the player is looking straight ahead and the screen is set on the side, as in this video, it is possible and very likely that the screener is outside of the defender's visual field. You are adding words to the definition of outside the visual field that are not in the rule. Additionally, since the screener in this play was not in control of the ball, the displacement caused by the collision should be considered incidental.

The NFHS rule 4-40 does verbatim. Side and front is visual field. Behind is not within visual field. NCAAM doesn't say the words side or front but meaning is same. 4-34-3. Within visual field anywhere short of contact is fine. Outside of it one step.

I did look up "visual field." Merriam Webster says the visual field is determined by person looking straight ahead. Anything in the periphery is within visual field. If I look straight ahead I can still see to side. Now if I concentrate so much on what is directly in front of me I can't see anything to side. I'm Not using my peripheral vision. That does not mean that what is there, the screener in this play, is not within my visual field.

Finally, 4-21-4 of NCAAM rules say player screened within visual field expected to avoid contact. Fact that he doesn't have the ball doesn't matter.