NCAAM - Inbound steal = Primary or secondary defender?

[bucky]

This is one problem with the forum, non one will just answer a simple question. They usually just provide more questions and in most cases, an answer can be garnered, but not in this case. That is why I asked for an opinion (when I said "what do you think?)

I am familiar with the rules and feel that this play may not have a specific rule to apply to it.

"Lets say only A2 and B1 are involved and all other players are "behind" them on the other half of the court. What do you have?" - In this case (not mine) I presume that B1 is inbounds and even able to guard A2. I would call him a primary defender when A2 gets the ball. But your question is not my case.

If a primary defender has not been established how can you have a secondary defender? The only way is an uneven fast break. - Maybe you can't, however you are not answering the question. Maybe another question regards when and how a primary defender is defined. Can a primary defender ever be out of bounds? In this play are there neither primary nor secondary defenders? Is that ever possible once an offense has been established?



In the OP, what would you rule and why? If you think B1 is a primary defender in the RA, then you have an offensive foul. If you think B1 is a secondary defender in the RA, then you have a defensive foul. If you think that B1 is neither a primary nor a secondary defender, then you have found a loophole in the rules regarding the RA......and you would have to make some sort of call based on something. I guess you could no-call it but that will anger more people than not.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by bucky

This is one problem with the forum, non one will just answer a simple question.....

So you want someone to make up a case play to satisfy your question?

One poster has said secondary defender rules apply and one poster says secondary defender rules don't apply.

Unless somewhere here has direct access to JD Collins or Art Hyland, all you're going to get are opinions. I don't think an answer is going to magically fall out of the sky. You are only going to get variations of this: If you think B1 is a primary defender in the RA, then you have an offensive foul. If you think B1 is a secondary defender in the RA, then you have a defensive foul. If you think that B1 is neither a primary nor a secondary defender, then you have found a loophole in the rules regarding the RA......and you would have to make some sort of call based on something.

[deecee]

Originally Posted by bucky

This is one problem with the forum...

I thought the answer revealed itself when you look at the definitions. I was wrong in the assumption that outnumbered only applied to more offense but the premise is the same.

I would say this defender is the primary defender with the assumption that it was just these 2 players on offense. Otherwise he *could* be secondary, but depends on some facts not presented.

You could have also provided what you *thought* it was.

[bob jenkins]

Surely there "must" be interps / videos / comments at a clinic when the rule was first put in place ... that deal with a fast break that turns into one offense and one defense.

I'd apply that ruling.

[Multiple Sports]

This play has been sent to a small college staff to be answered survey monkey. The defender is primary, the RA only applies to a "secondary" defender. It isn't a fast break situation so you can throw all of that out the door. The play is a charge....

[bucky]

Thanks for response.

I would like to know at what point they thought B1 became a primary defender...or even a defender. When the ball was stolen, B1 was out of bounds. Was he a primary defender, or defender at all, while out of bounds? Or did he become that after stepping inbounds? Whateves...I guess that is a different post.

[deecee]

Originally Posted by bucky

Thanks for response.

I would like to know at what point they thought B1 became a primary defender...or even a defender. When the ball was stolen, B1 was out of bounds. Was he a primary defender, or defender at all, while out of bounds? Or did he become that after stepping inbounds? Whateves...I guess that is a different post.

Dude, as an official you need to know when legal guarding position is established. That marks the beginning of "defending". You are letting primary/secondary confuse you.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by deecee

Dude, as an official you need to know when legal guarding position is established. That marks the beginning of "defending". You are letting primary/secondary confuse you.

I disagree. A player can be defending and/or guarding without having legal guarding position. It happens all the time, even hundreds of times per game.

[youngump]

Originally Posted by bucky

Thanks for response.

I would like to know at what point they thought B1 became a primary defender...or even a defender. When the ball was stolen, B1 was out of bounds. Was he a primary defender, or defender at all, while out of bounds? Or did he become that after stepping inbounds? Whateves...I guess that is a different post.

What a tangled mess this rule is. So suppose that in this play B1 remains out of bounds and B2 manages to cause a charge that's in the RA. If I've read this thread right, that's a charge because this is not an outnumbered fast break. But if B1 steps in just before the contact from A1 we have a block?

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by youngump

What a tangled mess this rule is. So suppose that in this play B1 remains out of bounds and B2 manages to cause a charge that's in the RA. If I've read this thread right, that's a charge because this is not an outnumbered fast break. But if B1 steps in just before the contact from A1 we have a block?

If B2 established legal guarding position outside of the RA, then B2 can take a charge inside of the RA if he maintained LGP the entire time.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[ilyazhito]

If B1 remains out of bounds and does not return, we have a different issue, out of bounds of his own volition. Normally, that gets called against an offensive player who uses the out-of-bounds area to evade a defender, but if a defender uses out-of-bounds to bend the rules to allow his teammate to draw a charge, I would punish the defender for being intentionally OOB, and call that instead of the apparent foul.