Illegal screens?

[Layman]

Greetings all,

This is my first post here, so please go easy on me

I'd like to hear some informed opinions on a couple of screens that were set late in the Tennessee-Texas women's game on Sunday. Both screens were set by Mercedes Russell, #21 in Orange. Neither one was called by the game officials.

The first was a rather unusual situation because it involves a collision in the backcourt where the screener is not squared to the defender. The second one is a rather typical high ball screen situation. I look forward to hearing your thoughts and insights.

[UNIgiantslayers]

I think I'm going the other way on both of those. On the first, she put her backside out into the defender in my opinion.

On 2, she's leaning, AND she's too wide.

There are much more knowledgeable and experienced officials here than myself who I would defer to though. Just my $.02.

Welcome to The Forum! Excellent video clipping and embedding skills, you'll fit right in.

Ugh, I hate players like this that bring very shitty very close to illegal screens into the game.

I double checked the NCAA-W rules to make sure I had the right language. I believe the first is illegal because a player "Shall not take a position so close to a moving opponent that this opponent cannot avoid contact by stopping or changing direction." (NCAA-W 4-5-3-c) It's important to not that the screener does not have to square to the defender being screened.

I believe the second is illegal based on NCAA-W 4-5-2-a: " The screener shall not lean into the path of an opponent or extend her hips into that path, even though the feet are stationary."

Obviously judgement and vision is a factor in both plays, and late in close games officials are much more likely to commit Errors of Omission versus Errors of Commission due to our wanting high certainty on high leverage plays.

[BryanV21]

I'm not a college official, men's or women's, but going by NFHS I'm calling offensive fouls on both. In the first she pushes her butt into the defender, and in the second she leans to her right into the defender's path.

The second one is tricky because yes it is illegal but the defender running into the screen throws her head back trying to sell a foul.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Legal screen in the first video and a block in the second video.

MTD, Sr.

[UNIgiantslayers]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Legal screen in the first video and a block in the second video.

MTD, Sr.

This is going to sound like I'm being sarcastic but I'm not. It's legal to move your body toward a defender during a screen? She stops and thrusts her hips backward into that girl.

[SNIPERBBB]

Originally Posted by UNIgiantslayers

This is going to sound like I'm being sarcastic but I'm not. It's legal to move your body toward a defender during a screen? She stops and thrusts her hips backward into that girl.

It's not clear if that happens.

[UNIgiantslayers]

Originally Posted by SNIPERBBB

It's not clear if that happens.

I guess I'll have to disagree with you fellas. My opinion is her backside clearly thrusts backward. Either way, it was a dirty play and I'm not giving her the benefit of the doubt on this especially since it's 80 feet from the basket.

[wyo96]

#1 is legal, the distance is not a factor as they were both going the "same" direction before #21 stopped and was ran into.

2 is illegal, but so close I can see why it was not called. She set wide and then "hipped" her.

[UNIgiantslayers]

Originally Posted by wyo96

#1 is legal, the distance is not a factor as they were both going the "same" direction before #21 stopped and was ran into.

2 is illegal, but so close I can see why it was not called. She set wide and then "hipped" her.

Our supervisor has been very clear that he wants #2 type screens cleaned up. If they are wider than their shoulders, he wants them called regardless of whether they are stationary/don't lean.

[rockyroad]

Play 1: the only time her butt was "sticking out" was when she first did her little jump stop. By the time the defender ran into her back, she was standing pretty much straight up. Nothing illegal to call there.

Play 2: illegal as others have already said.

[Layman]

Originally Posted by wyo96

#1 is legal, the distance is not a factor as they were both going the "same" direction before #21 stopped and was ran into.

I'm just wondering: in #1 how are they judged to be going in the "same direction"? The screener was going north-south and the defender was running diagonally.

Also, #21 doesn't even get her feet set until the defender is right on her shoulder. You don't think she's late?

I also feel like the thrusts her hips backward to help create the contact. I realize this may not be super-obvious (and hence the color analyst thought it was not a foul), but IMHO she clearly moves her hips a little bit.

Thanks to everyone for chiming in. It's great to hear the feedback.

[bob jenkins]

I agree that 1 is legal and 2 is illegal. I can see that the camera-side official might be blocked out in #2 -- but the far side official can get it.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by UNIgiantslayers

Our supervisor has been very clear that he wants #2 type screens cleaned up. If they are wider than their shoulders, he wants them called regardless of whether they are stationary/don't lean.

That's okay if the contact is with the outstretched leg (as this probably would have been). But, if the contact is with the torso, then it doesn't matter how wide the legs are.