Typical adult manipulation of a youth sports environment that focuses on the coach's desire to win rather than developing and teaching kids how to play.

Yes I am an official and moving screen is proper terminology. If the ring of players moved forward into the defending players this would constitute illegal contact, pretty simple.

Also as stated with rule 4-24-9 by Billymac it is a technical as played.

Thanks for your public forum information.

No, "moving screen" is not proper terminology. It may be commonly used, but it doesn't communicate something that is illegal. The contact that comes in combination with SOME "moving screens" may be illegal, but a moving screen is often legal and even sometimes with contact. So, calling a "moving screen" implies the wrong thing just as "being set" does.

Section 35

Art. 4. No player, while moving, shall set a screen that causes contact and delays an opponent from reaching a desired position.

Yes BUT, a player can set a screen while moving without creating the contact.

So not all moving screens are illegal.

Despite your name I'm gonna pretend you are an official.

So if you are reffing and coach asked you "justacoach, wasn't that a moving screen there?" you're gonna respond "No such thing Coach" like an ashole? Got it.

K next time an evaluator says that you missed a moving screen just tell him there is no issue with that because it may not have been illegal.

Ill be sure to add illegal moving screen to my future statements since no one will have any idea what I am talking about if I just say moving screen.

There is zero support for an accomplished official to have the term 'moving screen' in their vocabulary or thought process.
You sound like a guy who responds to a camp observer with a constant stream of 'yeah, but'.
Obviously you joined this forum with the desire to improve your skills. Learn to listen and heed the great advice that is directed your way from the many esteemed members here.

1. I can literally provide you with speeches and presentations from the top level officials using this vocabulary. I have listened to and interacted with NCAA evaluators, rules interpreters, and regional board members who use this terminology.

2. Literally the exact opposite of who I am, great to see you make outlandish judgements about people knowing little to nothing about them.

3. Yup, but you are not one of them

You said it was proper rule book terminology. It is not.

Don't get upset when you make a definitive statement and then get challenged.

Plenty of esteemed officials use "over-the-back" and "reaching". Doesn't make those phrases rule book terminology.

Me, I ignore it when coaches yell out about "moving screens" b/c most time they are referring to a play where an offensive player is legally running down the court and just happen to be in the way of a defender.

If you are going to split hairs I said it was proper terminology, not proper rule book terminology.

Based on the amount of clinicians and board members I have listened to use that "terminology" I deem it in the very least acceptable if not proper.

And if you include the next article (IIRC), it says that the screener can be moving at the time of contact if the movement is in the same path and direction. So, you can even have a "moving screen" with contact that still isn't a foul.

Just because a lot of good officials use the term doesn't make it proper.

I can accept that term when it is used by an ignorant coach or fan but not by an official . My response would include the term illegal contact.

So far as ashole, you will be shocked that 2 officials I have trained, from birth, are currently working games where they have numbers on the back of their officiating jerseys. Pretend you could ever attain that level, you disrespectful dip$hit.

Classy

Are we quite done?