The Official Forum
Page 7 of 7 « First 56 7
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)
-   Basketball (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/)
-   -   Shooter landing on defender laying on floor (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/104203-shooter-landing-defender-laying-floor.html)

BillyMac Thu Dec 20, 2018 01:39am
And Truth Isn’t Truth ...
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by bucky (Post 1027517)
Just because the words are not there does not mean that the words are not there.
“No, it isn’t truth! Truth isn’t truth because it’s somebody’s version of the truth, not the truth.” (Rudy Giuliani, August, 2018)

thedewed Thu Dec 20, 2018 04:12am
Quote:
Originally Posted by bucky (Post 1027517)
I would not necessarily say all of that BM. Just because the words are not there does not mean that the words are not there. In other words, it may not say it, but it references rule 4-23-5d and that rule explicitly discusses obtaining legal position. Additionally, rule 4-23 mentions both feet touching the playing court, initial legal guarding position, etc. Now, that is not exactly what you wrote but I think you get my point. The case may not say things but rules that they reference might.



And not sure why Raymond is going on about someone on the floor setting a screen as screeners are vertical.

Yep. Ballgame.

Raymond Thu Dec 20, 2018 08:40am
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyMac (Post 1027518)
You may be correct here:

The screener must stay within his/her vertical plane with a stance approximately shoulder width apart.

I prefer the phrase "vertical cylinder" but the NFHS sticks to "vertical plane".
Can defender have their legs and arms outside of their vertical plane? Can a defender have his leg outstretched and have contact with a ball-handler? Can he stand with his arm out-stretched and have a ball-handler run into it? What is the verticality space of a player who is prone on the court?

BillyMac Thu Dec 20, 2018 09:15am
Horizontal And Vertical ...
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raymond (Post 1027525)
What is the vertical space of a player who is prone on the court?
Exactly my point. A player standing on the court has a vertical plane while a player laying on the floor has a horizontal plane.

NFHS rules regarding a player's legal posture usually assume that a player is standing up and use the term vertical regarding such. These rules seldom take into consideration that a player may be laying on the floor, thus the almost complete lack of the term horizontal in rules describing a player's legal posture, in fact it's quite the opposite, the term horizontal often describes a player's illegal posture.

Are we to assume that once a player falls to the floor that rules using the term vertical should now be mentally changed to the term horizontal?

Raymond Thu Dec 20, 2018 09:36am
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyMac (Post 1027528)
...

Are we to assume that once a player falls to the floor that rules using the term vertical should now be mentally changed to the term horizontal?
I'm saying a player is entitled to a spot on the floor WITHIN his vertical plane. A prone player is outside of his vertical plane. There is always a blanket statement that a player is entitled to his spot on the floor, with no qualifications. Well, we already know a prone player who contacts a defender is responsible for an illegal screen. We already know a stationary defender with his arms outstretched is responsible for illegal contact to his arms, no matter how stationary he is and how long he has been there. And we no longer have a case play that says a prone player is entitled to his spot on the floor. Defense is based on the principles of LGP and/or verticality.

BillyMac Thu Dec 20, 2018 10:35am
The Ghost Of Caseplay Past ...
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raymond (Post 1027530)
... we no longer have a case play that says a prone player is entitled to his spot on the floor.
Your posts are rational and intelligent and may, indeed, be correct.

Based on 4-23-1, no apparent relevant rule changes since the caseplay was removed, and no announcement as to why it was removed (with nothing different to replace it), I'm sticking to the caseplay "ghost", but acknowledge that I may be absolutely wrong in doing so.

Stupid NFHS.

BillyMac Thu Dec 20, 2018 10:59am
It Could That Happen ...
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by CJP (Post 1027491)
I don't see any 7'ers.
Heard that there was a 6' 9" kid in a middle school game last week.

His team lost.

https://tse1.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP.2...=0&w=265&h=161

chapmaja Sat Dec 22, 2018 03:43pm
I would add this part of the rulebook (at least from the 2012-2013 book).

Part of the definition of 4-23-1 states " every player is entitled to a sport on the playing court provide such player gets their FIRST without illegally contacting an opponent."

The player got to the spot on the floor first, and did so without illegal contacting an opponent, therefore I have nothing on team B and an argument could be made for a foul on Team A for landing on the player.

Personally I am not calling anything on this play.

jmwking Sat Dec 22, 2018 06:51pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by chapmaja (Post 1027644)
I would add this part of the rulebook (at least from the 2012-2013 book).

Part of the definition of 4-23-1 states " every player is entitled to a sport on the playing court provide such player gets their FIRST without illegally contacting an opponent."

The player got to the spot on the floor first, and did so without illegal contacting an opponent, therefore I have nothing on team B and an argument could be made for a foul on Team A for landing on the player.

Personally I am not calling anything on this play.
Tweet! Grammar!

(Grammar got run over by a reindeer... Happy and safe holidays, everyone!)

AremRed Sat Dec 22, 2018 07:35pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camron Rust (Post 1027244)
Philosophies and principles remain unless and until something says otherwise. If we limited how we do things and how things are called to only what is in the rule book and case book, the game would look dramatically different than it does. Cases are removed due to space limitations. When they are reversed, there is typically a case expressing the new ruling. Without that, it is still valid.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AremRed (Post 1027282)
Do you call technical foul every time a team runs out of the locker room around the opposing team?
Bump.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:54am.
Page 7 of 7 « First 56 7
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1