Did I miss this?

[slinky]

I've been playing basketball for 35 years, and I was playing last night, and my competitor came up with 2 new rules that I wasn't aware of, or he's making them up from his way of learning it.



I was on defense in the key, offense was in green.

Green wing was moving towards the left post. When that happened, I was going to help and contest the other player, but my guy that I was guarding, with his back to the hoop, was moving down the block, so that I could not get past him. To me, that seemed like a moving screen, but he said he was just moving normally around the court.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by slinky

To me, that seemed like a moving screen, but he said he was just moving normally around the court.

That's why officials get the big bucks.

[HokiePaul]

Some rules that would apply in general to this situation:

SECTION 23 GUARDING
ART. 1 . . . Guarding is the act of legally placing the body in the path of an offensive opponent. There is no minimum distance required between the guard and opponent, but the maximum is 6 feet when closely guarded. Every player is entitled to a spot on the playing court provided such player gets there first without illegally contacting an opponent. A player who extends an arm, hip or leg into the path of an opponent is not considered to have a legal position if contact occurs.

SECTION 27 INCIDENTAL CONTACT
Incidental contact is contact with an opponent which is permitted and which does not constitute a foul.
ART. 1 . . . The mere fact that contact occurs does not constitute a foul. When 10 players are moving rapidly in a limited area, some contact is certain to occur.
ART. 2 . . . Contact, which may result when opponents are in equally favorable positions to perform normal defensive or offensive movements, should not be considered illegal, even though the contact may be severe.
ART. 3 . . . Similarly, contact which does not hinder the opponent from participating in normal defensive or offensive movements should be considered incidental.

Originally Posted by slinky

I've been playing basketball for 35 years, and I was playing last night, and my competitor came up with 2 new rules that I wasn't aware of, or he's making them up from his way of learning it.



I was on defense in the key, offense was in green.

Green wing was moving towards the left post. When that happened, I was going to help and contest the other player, but my guy that I was guarding, with his back to the hoop, was moving down the block, so that I could not get past him. To me, that seemed like a moving screen, but he said he was just moving normally around the court.

Your competitor is full of you-know-what. If he is restricting you from coming to play help defense then he may certainly be subject to a foul for illegal screening. I have seen this a couple times, especially in those situations where the offensive player argues "I was just posting up". That's on our judgement and why we get paid to make those decisions.

[deecee]

Originally Posted by AremRed

Your competitor is full of you-know-what. If he is restricting you from coming to play help defense then he may certainly be subject to a foul for illegal screening. I have seen this a couple times, especially in those situations where the offensive player argues "I was just posting up". That's on our judgement and why we get paid to make those decisions.

Implies offensive player initiated contact. No where in the OP does that seem the case, and a player can "move" when screening absent contact. If the defender is always on the post players back side then that's on the defender.

[UNIgiantslayers]

Have you guys noticed an uptick in the number of "screen and rolls" than seem more like the screener moving the defender down to give the shooter room? It seems like I see this way more than I used to, and coaches get so mad when I call it. Sorry, but the screener does not get carry an on-ball defender down into the paint with him.

[JRutledge]

No such fouls as a moving screen. It is that simple.

Peace

[deecee]

Originally Posted by UNIgiantslayers

Have you guys noticed an uptick in the number of "screen and rolls" than seem more like the screener moving the defender down to give the shooter room? It seems like I see this way more than I used to, and coaches get so mad when I call it. Sorry, but the screener does not get carry an on-ball defender down into the paint with him.

Yes. In a pick and roll where the roller drives the primary onball defender down with them, and essentially forcing a switch, is an illegal screen for displacement. The expectation, at least at the NCAA level, is that we call these fouls. Oftentimes in HS they are not called, which is incorrect.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by AremRed

Your competitor is full of you-know-what. If he is restricting you from coming to play help defense then he may certainly be subject to a foul for illegal screening. I have seen this a couple times, especially in those situations where the offensive player argues "I was just posting up". That's on our judgement and why we get paid to make those decisions.

Agree. If, when a defender is trying to get to the another player, there is contact while the offensive post is moving, that is a foul....illegal screen.

A player also doesn't have to be "trying" to screen in order to screen and be subject to the rules of screening. For a player to legally block a moving opponent's path to another spot, that player has to do so by being stationary for 1-2 steps. If there is contact before that occurs...illegal screen. The only exception is if the opponent is moving DIRECTLY away from the defender.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by deecee

Implies offensive player initiated contact. No where in the OP does that seem the case, and a player can "move" when screening absent contact. If the defender is always on the post players back side then that's on the defender.

Nothing about the screening rules relies on who initiated contact. In fact, very few fouls are about who initiated contact. That is a common fallacy that often leads to the wrong result.

The foul is on the offensive player if they haven't met the requirements of screening when contact occurs, regardless of who initiated it.

If the defender is on the post player's backside and is trying to get around to another opponent but can't because the post keeps shifting to cut off the path (with contact), that is an illegal screen.

[slinky]

Thanks for the great insights and discussion!

[bucky]

Am I to understand that this was pick-up basketball? If so, no foul on this. Pretty standard play for pick-up ball.

Originally Posted by deecee

Implies offensive player initiated contact. No where in the OP does that seem the case, and a player can "move" when screening absent contact. If the defender is always on the post players back side then that's on the defender.

My post implies the offensive player was doing the restricting, ergo the illegal action would be his fault. And yeah you have to have contact for a foul.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by bucky

Am I to understand that this was pick-up basketball? If so, no foul on this. Pretty standard play for pick-up ball.

I played pickup asphalt playground, with metal chain nets, basketball for many years. I do not remember a single illegal screen called. Not one. And I'm pretty sure that if I ever called one, I would be looking for a new playground to play basketball, probably under an assumed name.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by AremRed

... you have to have contact for a foul.

Yes sir.

A moving screen is not in and of itself a foul; illegal contact must occur for a foul to be called. If a blind screen is set on a stationary defender, the defender must be given one normal step to change direction, and attempt to avoid contact. If a screen is set on a moving defender, the defender gets a minimum of one step, and a maximum of two steps, depending on the speed, and distance of the defender.