Screening

[Big_Blue_Wannabe]

Whatcha got on this? And why??

https://youtu.be/eDBuxgrZ52k

[zm1283]

Nothing.

Screener gave plenty of time and distance. Turned his torso to absorb contact. The rule book even states that on a blind screen the player being screened may not see the screener in time to avoid contact and the collision might be severe but should be ruled incidental.

If you feel like the defensive player saw the screener and displaced him, push on the defense.

[johnny d]

Illegal screen. Turning of the torso may have been to absorb contact, but he turned such that his torso (right shoulder) was moving forward into the defender at the time of the screen.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by johnny d

Illegal screen. Turning of the torso may have been to absorb contact, but he turned such that his torso (right shoulder) was moving forward into the defender at the time of the screen.

That is really splitting hairs.

Despite the turn, even if it was just a bit towards the opponent. I see that turn as a movement to protect himself from getting crushed. He even stepped away with the left foot.

Originally Posted by zm1283

The rule book even states that on a blind screen the player being screened may not see the screener in time to avoid contact and the collision might be severe but should be ruled incidental.

If you feel like the defensive player saw the screener and displaced him, push on the defense.

This wasn't a blind screen, the defender was running forward right at it. Just because he had is head turned doesn't make it blind. It just means he wasn't looking where he was going. A blind screen is one set outside of the visual field and visual field is defined as behind the screened player.

Push on the defender.

[Randa16]

I am calling him for illegal screen. It’s going to be a nightmare trying to sell that to a coach.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Big_Blue_Wannabe

Whatcha got on this? And why??

I am calling a foul on the defender. The screener was just trying to protect himself. Nothing hard to sell, he has a right to prepare for contact. And he did not turn directly into him.

Peace

[crosscountry55]

Originally Posted by Randa16

I am calling him for illegal screen. It’s going to be a nightmare trying to sell that to a coach.

Um. No. Bad rationale.

Nothing by the book, but if you’re in the camp of “gotta call something” (which I probably would be here), it’s a push on the defender. To say he displaced the legal screener is an understatement.

Not hard to sell to the defender’s coach at all. Screener stood there like a tree. He might not be happy but I’m keeping that conversation very short and we’re moving on.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[zm1283]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

That is really splitting hairs.

Despite the turn, even if it was just a bit towards the opponent. I see that turn as a movement to protect himself from getting crushed. He even stepped away with the left foot.




This wasn't a blind screen, the defender was running forward right at it. Just because he had is head turned doesn't make it blind. It just means he wasn't looking where he was going. A blind screen is one set outside of the visual field and visual field is defined as behind the screened player.

Push on the defender.

Now that I watch it again, you're right. Push on the defender.

[Randa16]

Originally Posted by crosscountry55

Um. No. Bad rationale.

Nothing by the book, but if you’re in the camp of “gotta call something” (which I probably would be here), it’s a push on the defender. To say he displaced the legal screener is an understatement.

Not hard to sell to the defender’s coach at all. Screener stood there like a tree. He might not be happy but I’m keeping that conversation very short and we’re moving on.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I still believe it was a illegal screen just my take. Not scared to piss off a coach just saying it would be a hard sell.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by Randa16

I am calling him for illegal screen. It’s going to be a nightmare trying to sell that to a coach.

Let me understand your "logic". A1 sets a legal Screen, but you are going call a Blocking Foul on A1 because you do not want to deal with the "nightmare" of selling a Charging Foul against B1 to B-HC?

You do not want to know what I think of that kind of "illogical" thinking. By my standards, I am speechless right now.

MTD, Sr.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Randa16

I still believe it was a illegal screen just my take. Not scared to piss off a coach just saying it would be a hard sell.

By what rule is that an illegal screen?

[Randa16]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Let me understand your "logic". A1 sets a legal Screen, but you are going call a Blocking Foul on A1 because you do not want to deal with the "nightmare" of selling a Charging Foul against B1 to B-HC?

You do not want to know what I think of that kind of "illogical" thinking. By my standards, I am speechless right now.

MTD, Sr.

Look I like this site and most guys here seem nice. I have no problem having a discussion but not going to be treated like I am beneath someone. I clearly stated after that saying I feel it was an illegal screen and have NO PROBLEM explaining that to a coach but it would be a hard sell since the kid moved.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Randa16

Look I like this site and most guys here seem nice. I have no problem having a discussion but not going to be treated like I am beneath someone. I clearly stated after that saying I feel it was an illegal screen and have NO PROBLEM explaining that to a coach but it would be a hard sell since the kid moved.

You never explained why it is an illegal screen.

[Randa16]

Originally Posted by Raymond

You never explained why it is an illegal screen.

In my mind the kid moved toward the defender. I have no problem with him going back a little for impact but he goes up. Just my opinion

[bob jenkins]

Push through the screen.

What was the call in the OP?