The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #16 (permalink)  
Old Fri Feb 09, 2018, 03:23pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 607
Quote:
Originally Posted by SNIPERBBB View Post
The words "moving screen" as a phrase does not show up in the case or rule books
While this may be technically true, there are definitely words/phrases that describe a moving screener, screener that is moving, screening a moving opponent, etc.
__________________
If some rules are never enforced, then why do they exist?
Reply With Quote
  #17 (permalink)  
Old Fri Feb 09, 2018, 03:26pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 607
Quote:
Originally Posted by scrounge View Post
True....but rule 4-40-2 says the screener must be stationary, and 10-7-11 says it's a foul if a player does not adhere to the rules of screening found in 4-40. So....would not 'moving' be a reasonable opposite of 'stationary'? Non-stationary sounds a bit stilted, no?

Seems to me that "moving screen" is a perfectly reasonable phrase to use for a foul, as a common description to why this particular illegal screen is illegal.
That is only part of establishing a legal screen. Simply continue reading section 40. There are other articles.
__________________
If some rules are never enforced, then why do they exist?
Reply With Quote
  #18 (permalink)  
Old Fri Feb 09, 2018, 03:26pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: A little east of there.
Posts: 589
Quote:
Originally Posted by scrounge View Post
True....but rule 4-40-2 says the screener must be stationary, and 10-7-11 says it's a foul if a player does not adhere to the rules of screening found in 4-40. So....would not 'moving' be a reasonable opposite of 'stationary'? Non-stationary sounds a bit stilted, no?

Seems to me that "moving screen" is a perfectly reasonable phrase to use for a foul.
I prefer to use the word (and show) "block" then punch the other way to describe illegal contact by A2 resulting from an attempt to screen opponent B1, for instance.

Perhaps I'm wrong?
Reply With Quote
  #19 (permalink)  
Old Fri Feb 09, 2018, 03:29pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: SE Ohio
Posts: 938
Quote:
Originally Posted by scrounge View Post
True....but rule 4-40-2 says the screener must be stationary, and 10-7-11 says it's a foul if a player does not adhere to the rules of screening found in 4-40. So....would not 'moving' be a reasonable opposite of 'stationary'? Non-stationary sounds a bit stilted, no?

Seems to me that "moving screen" is a perfectly reasonable phrase to use for a foul, as a common description to why this particular illegal screen is illegal.
A screener may be moving if he/she is moving the same direction as the defender.
Reply With Quote
  #20 (permalink)  
Old Fri Feb 09, 2018, 03:37pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 455
Quote:
Originally Posted by #olderthanilook View Post
I prefer to use the word (and show) "block" then punch the other way to describe illegal contact by A2 resulting from an attempt to screen opponent B1, for instance.

Perhaps I'm wrong?
We've been told to show block and punch.
Reply With Quote
  #21 (permalink)  
Old Fri Feb 09, 2018, 03:40pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 16,736
Quote:
Originally Posted by Umonblue View Post
So if an offensive player moves late in front of a defensive player (to set a pick) and makes that defensive player stop or go around him without contact then there's no call? No Violation for an Illegal/Moving screen? Reason I ask I saw this in a college basketball game and called as a violation...that crew must have called it wrong then.
I find it unlikely that a college crew called a "moving screen violation."
Reply With Quote
  #22 (permalink)  
Old Fri Feb 09, 2018, 03:42pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 607
Quote:
Originally Posted by SNIPERBBB View Post
A screener may be moving if he/she is moving the same direction as the defender.
Getting warmer... same direction and path.
__________________
If some rules are never enforced, then why do they exist?
Reply With Quote
  #23 (permalink)  
Old Fri Feb 09, 2018, 03:52pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. View Post
Nolan:

I think you need to re-read NFHS R-S40-A4 again before you make that statement. I don't have my NCAA Men's and Women's Rules Books in front of me but they have the same Definition as the NFHS Rules have.

MTD, Sr.
Oh I did before I made the post. It's not there.
Reply With Quote
  #24 (permalink)  
Old Fri Feb 09, 2018, 04:35pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 1,026
Quote:
Originally Posted by Umonblue View Post
So if an offensive player moves late in front of a defensive player (to set a pick) and makes that defensive player stop or go around him without contact then there's no call? No Violation for an Illegal/Moving screen? Reason I ask I saw this in a college basketball game and called as a violation...that crew must have called it wrong then.
What you may witnessed is a screen set out of bounds. In that case, it is a violation and there does not need to be contact.
Reply With Quote
  #25 (permalink)  
Old Fri Feb 09, 2018, 04:59pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 16,736
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay R View Post
What you may witnessed is a screen set out of bounds. In that case, it is a violation and there does not need to be contact.
Reference, please.
Reply With Quote
  #26 (permalink)  
Old Fri Feb 09, 2018, 05:38pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 1,026
Quote:
Originally Posted by bob jenkins View Post
Reference, please.
My bad. Looked in the rule book and could not find it. I thought the NCAA had a similar to the NBA.

The NCAA rule book says that a screen must be set inbounds for it to be legal. Does that mean that a screen set OOB is ruled a foul?
Reply With Quote
  #27 (permalink)  
Old Fri Feb 09, 2018, 07:29pm
Administrator
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Toledo, Ohio, U.S.A.
Posts: 7,410
Send a message via AIM to Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. Send a message via MSN to Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. Send a message via Yahoo to Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nolanjj68 View Post
Oh I did before I made the post. It's not there.

I typed the wrong Rule reference. It should have read: R4-S40-A6, not R4-S40-S4.

I corrected my original post.

MTD, Sr.
__________________
Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.
Trumbull Co. (Warren, Ohio) Bkb. Off. Assn.
Wood Co. (Bowling Green, Ohio) Bkb. Off. Assn.
Toledo, Ohio
Reply With Quote
  #28 (permalink)  
Old Fri Feb 09, 2018, 07:49pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 682
Quote:
Originally Posted by scrounge View Post
True....but rule 4-40-2 says the screener must be stationary, and 10-7-11 says it's a foul if a player does not adhere to the rules of screening found in 4-40. So....would not 'moving' be a reasonable opposite of 'stationary'? Non-stationary sounds a bit stilted, no?

Seems to me that "moving screen" is a perfectly reasonable phrase to use for a foul, as a common description to why this particular illegal screen is illegal.
I'll concede "moving" is a reasonable antonym of "stationary". However, without contact, there is no "screen". Thus "moving screen" is still invalid in this context, and only serves to confuse people into thinking that moving while attempting to screen without contact is against the rules.
__________________
Things turn out best for people who make the best of the way things turn out.
-- John Wooden
Reply With Quote
  #29 (permalink)  
Old Fri Feb 09, 2018, 08:38pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 16,736
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay R View Post
My bad. Looked in the rule book and could not find it. I thought the NCAA had a similar to the NBA.

The NCAA rule book says that a screen must be set inbounds for it to be legal. Does that mean that a screen set OOB is ruled a foul?
Yes, if there's contact that creates an advantage (similar to how you'd call a screen that's "too wide").

FED does not have that language, but it should.
Reply With Quote
  #30 (permalink)  
Old Fri Feb 09, 2018, 09:33pm
Esteemed Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 16,213
From The List ...

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.
__________________
John 3:16 "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life."
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Moving screen hbioteach Basketball 5 Sat Jan 05, 2008 08:57am
Moving screen (or not) MPLAHE Basketball 46 Fri Nov 18, 2005 07:33am
moving screen MPLAHE Basketball 15 Fri Feb 11, 2005 01:19pm
moving screen just another ref Basketball 57 Mon Mar 15, 2004 08:57am
Moving screen? egausch Basketball 19 Fri Feb 15, 2002 10:04am


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:50am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1