Illegal screens?

[UNIgiantslayers]

I've got a lot of respect for the rules knowledge of the people on this thread who have disagreed with me so I would have a rookie take their word. I don't think it's beneficial for me to keep stating my case, so I'll just say this and move on. In real time, if I'm calling that game, I'm going the other way. I don't think my assignor would have a problem defending that call. I've watched it 10 times, and every time it looks to me like she purposely sticks her rear end ever so slightly into the defender. As I said before, this is a garbage play 80 feet from the basket. She needs to clean it up, there was no reason for that in my opinion and I'm going to help her clean it up if I'm calling that game because on top of being (IMO) illegal, it's a bs screen that was only set so that she could put somebody on their back end. I don't mean to turn this into a debate and I've made my position clear so I won't continue to beat a dead horse after this post.

[Eastshire]

Originally Posted by UNIgiantslayers

I've got a lot of respect for the rules knowledge of the people on this thread who have disagreed with me so I would have a rookie take their word. I don't think it's beneficial for me to keep stating my case, so I'll just say this and move on. In real time, if I'm calling that game, I'm going the other way. I don't think my assignor would have a problem defending that call. I've watched it 10 times, and every time it looks to me like she purposely sticks her rear end ever so slightly into the defender. As I said before, this is a garbage play 80 feet from the basket. She needs to clean it up, there was no reason for that in my opinion and I'm going to help her clean it up if I'm calling that game because on top of being (IMO) illegal, it's a bs screen that was only set so that she could put somebody on their back end. I don't mean to turn this into a debate and I've made my position clear so I won't continue to beat a dead horse after this post.

I think it's a dangerous habit to allow your opinion on a legal tactic to color your perception of that tactic. We aren't supposed to be avenging gods but impartial judges evenly applying the rules (even when we personally don't like the result).

[Kelvin green]

Originally Posted by UNIgiantslayers

I've got a lot of respect for the rules knowledge of the people on this thread who have disagreed with me so I would have a rookie take their word. I don't think it's beneficial for me to keep stating my case, so I'll just say this and move on. In real time, if I'm calling that game, I'm going the other way. I don't think my assignor would have a problem defending that call. I've watched it 10 times, and every time it looks to me like she purposely sticks her rear end ever so slightly into the defender. As I said before, this is a garbage play 80 feet from the basket. She needs to clean it up, there was no reason for that in my opinion and I'm going to help her clean it up if I'm calling that game because on top of being (IMO) illegal, it's a bs screen that was only set so that she could put somebody on their back end. I don't mean to turn this into a debate and I've made my position clear so I won't continue to beat a dead horse after this post.

I will beat a dead horse. A couple of things you need to think about.
This is not a garbage play. You have claimed it is dirty. Sorry but it’s not.

What does the player do wrong? She stops. Let me reiterate she stops. You claim she put her butt out... but look how she stands.... she is entitled to any place on the floor she gets to first.... if she had the ball and stopped, would you say it is a dirty play?

It is not s a garbage play any more than a blinde side screen. Blind picks can be violent. It doesn’t mean it is cheap or garbage.

It’s not a bs screen. ... this is no different than a player slowing down to bunch up defenders so players team mate gets an easy layup ( the Legal moving screen)

You want to clean up a Legal play.

It was a contested play/screen on a steal not 80 feet from basket.

It makes no difference which way she was facing. If she turned 180 would you say the same thing? I doubt it... screening requires no particular way to face.

And lastly... you have no rule to back you up. Calling this is just making up something as you go along. Just because you didn’t like the play...what other rules do you make up because you thought play was garbage?

Some random thoughts....

[CJP]

Originally Posted by Kelvin green

I will beat a dead horse. A couple of things you need to think about.
This is not a garbage play. You have claimed it is dirty. Sorry but it’s not.

What does the player do wrong? She stops. Let me reiterate she stops. You claim she put her butt out... but look how she stands.... she is entitled to any place on the floor she gets to first.... if she had the ball and stopped, would you say it is a dirty play?

It is not s a garbage play any more than a blinde side screen. Blind picks can be violent. It doesn’t mean it is cheap or garbage.

It’s not a bs screen. ... this is no different than a player slowing down to bunch up defenders so players team mate gets an easy layup ( the Legal moving screen)

You want to clean up a Legal play.

It was a contested play/screen on a steal not 80 feet from basket.

It makes no difference which way she was facing. If she turned 180 would you say the same thing? I doubt it... screening requires no particular way to face.

And lastly... you have no rule to back you up. Calling this is just making up something as you go along. Just because you didn’t like the play...what other rules do you make up because you thought play was garbage?

Some random thoughts....

The rules do support a foul call here. The two players are not moving in the same path and direction (screener is moving parallel to the sideline and the player screened is moving about 45 degrees from the sideline direction). Time and distance should be allowed.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by CJP

The rules do support a foul call here. The two players are not moving in the same path and direction (screener is moving parallel to the sideline and the player screened is moving about 45 degrees from the sideline direction). Time and distance should be allowed.

This is a statement right out of the Simplified and Illustrated Rulebook, which is also a statement from the rules directly.

When screening an opponent who is moving in the same path and direction as the screener, the player behind is responsible if contact is made because the player in front slows down or stops and the player behind overruns his or her opponent.

Nothing in the rule talks about what angle degree or that they have to be straight behind them. This player was running at an opponent that was moving up the court. The Tennesee player did not change her direction and cause the contact. She did not see the opponent for some strange reason.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Nothing in the rule talks about what angle degree or that they have to be straight behind them.

Be careful. I've got a protractor in my pocket and I know how to use it.

[BigCat]

1st is legal 21 just stopped. I don't think she stuck her backside out to make the contact. The player in gray just assumed 21 was going to keep running.

2nd is illegal and I wouldn't pass on it.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

This is a statement right out of the Simplified and Illustrated Rulebook, which is also a statement from the rules directly.



Nothing in the rule talks about what angle degree or that they have to be straight behind them. This player was running at an opponent that was moving up the court. The Tennesee player did not change her direction and cause the contact. She did not see the opponent for some strange reason.

Peace

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Be careful. I've got a protractor in my pocket and I know how to use it.

Jeff:

You sound like me in quoting the Simplified and Illustrated Rule Book, .

And between Billy, a Chemist, and me, a Structural Engineer we have pocket protectors, mechanical pencils, and protractors covered.

MTD, Sr.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

And between Billy, a Chemist, and me, a Structural Engineer we've got pocket protectors, mechanical pencils, and protractors covered.

You forgot slide rulers. I've got one and I'm not afraid to use it. If they outlaw slide rulers only outlaws will have slide rulers.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Jeff:

You sound like me in quoting the Simplified and Illustrated Rule Book, .

And between Billy, a Chemist, and me, a Structural Engineer we pocket protectors, mechanical pencils, and protractors covered.

MTD, Sr.

But apparently not English. Remember to proofread carefully to see if you any words out.

[CJP]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

This is a statement right out of the Simplified and Illustrated Rulebook, which is also a statement from the rules directly.



Nothing in the rule talks about what angle degree or that they have to be straight behind them. This player was running at an opponent that was moving up the court. The Tennesee player did not change her direction and cause the contact. She did not see the opponent for some strange reason.

Peace

True or false . A person traveling east and a person traveling southeast are traving in the same direction on the same path.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by CJP

The rules do support a foul call here. The two players are not moving in the same path and direction (screener is moving parallel to the sideline and the player screened is moving about 45 degrees from the sideline direction). Time and distance should be allowed.

The screener is moving away from the defender and then stops. There is no rule that says a player cannot stop. It makes absolutely no sense that a player moving away from a Defender is how somehow responsible for the contact simply for stopping.

Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk

[UNIgiantslayers]

Originally Posted by Kelvin green

I will beat a dead horse. A couple of things you need to think about.
This is not a garbage play. You have claimed it is dirty. Sorry but it’s not.

What does the player do wrong? She stops. Let me reiterate she stops. You claim she put her butt out... but look how she stands.... she is entitled to any place on the floor she gets to first.... if she had the ball and stopped, would you say it is a dirty play?

It is not s a garbage play any more than a blinde side screen. Blind picks can be violent. It doesn’t mean it is cheap or garbage.

It’s not a bs screen. ... this is no different than a player slowing down to bunch up defenders so players team mate gets an easy layup ( the Legal moving screen)

You want to clean up a Legal play.

It was a contested play/screen on a steal not 80 feet from basket.

It makes no difference which way she was facing. If she turned 180 would you say the same thing? I doubt it... screening requires no particular way to face.

And lastly... you have no rule to back you up. Calling this is just making up something as you go along. Just because you didn’t like the play...what other rules do you make up because you thought play was garbage?

Some random thoughts....

All of this would be great stuff if it weren't built on the false premise that it was legal. I don't see it as a legal screen because she puts her backside/hips into the defender. Good thoughts though. As I said, no reason to beat a dead horse as to why I see it as illegal, if you need to see my thoughts on that, feel free to scroll through them. I've read through everyone else's thoughts on what they saw and it sounds like I'm not the only one who sees an illegal screen. Have a good week, fellas.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by UNIgiantslayers

All of this would be great stuff if it weren't built on the false premise that it was legal. I don't see it as a legal screen because she puts her backside/hips into the defender. Good thoughts though. As I said, no reason to beat a dead horse as to why I see it as illegal, if you need to see my thoughts on that, feel free to scroll through them. I've read through everyone else's thoughts on what they saw and it sounds like I'm not the only one who sees an illegal screen. Have a good week, fellas.

The defender ran squarely into the small of the screener's back; that won't change no matter how much you are upset about the play. Her a$$ & hips had nothing to do with the contact.

[UNIgiantslayers]

Originally Posted by Raymond

The defender ran squarely into the small of the screener's back; that won't change no matter how much you are upset about the play. Her a$$ & hips had nothing to do with the contact.

I'm not upset about the play. I just don't agree with you. Continuing to say the same thing that I don't agree with isn't going to change my mind. Appreciate your perspective though.