Illegal Screen?

[deecee]

Yes I meant offense in that spot.

So say you have 3 players running parallel

A1 A2 B1

B1 then wants to guard A1 and turns to go guard A1 but makes contact with A2 who is still moving in the same path he/she is. You would call this a foul whereas I say it's not a foul on A2. He didn't do anything wrong at all.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by deecee

Yes I meant offense in that spot.

So say you have 3 players running parallel

A1 A2 B1

B1 then wants to guard A1 and turns to go guard A1 but makes contact with A2 who is still moving in the same path he/she is. You would call this a foul whereas I say it's not a foul on A2. He didn't do anything wrong at all.

First, A2 is not moving in the same path as anyone. They're parallel paths, not the same one. If they're in the same path, then A2 need not stop if B1 is following in that path.

A2's movement is continuing to cut off B1's path to A1. A2 must follow the rules for screening. What ever path B1 attempts to take to A1, A2 must be in it 1-2 steps before B1 reaches the spot, not just before.

What you have just described is a textbook illegal screen. It usually happens across the top but it isn't any different just because they're running down the court.

[deecee]

I respectfully disagree. No where does it say that an offensive player must stop movement simply because a defender is about to cross paths with them. The 1-2 steps caveat is in relations to the setting of a screen, not a decree that an offensive player must give a defender 1-2 steps leeway of any contact.

[Nevadaref]

Camron is right.
Offensive players cannot be running around the court and causing collisions with defensive players who are attempting to reach the ballhandler. That is an illegal screen.

Picture the NFL “pick play” in which two wide receivers cross. During this movement one WR runs into the defensive back who is attempting to guard another WR. This leaves the second WR open to receive a pass. This is illegal in football (offensive pass interference) and is also an illegal screen on a basketball court.

In order to be legal in a basketball game A2 must come to a stop before contact occurs. Also, as Camron has stated, A2 must come to a stop and give B1 1 or 2 strides because B1 is a moving opponent. If B1 were stationary, A2 can stop anywhere short of contact with the opponent, except when behind him and then he must give 1 step.

The onus is on the offensive player to stop in a basketball game. The reason is that defenders need to be allowed to move in order to guard. This is the very reason why we have screening rules. If we didn’t, then non-ballhandlers on offense would simply run into the defenders and knock them down or away from the ballhandler.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by deecee

I respectfully disagree. No where does it say that an offensive player must stop movement simply because a defender is about to cross paths with them. The 1-2 steps caveat is in relations to the setting of a screen, not a decree that an offensive player must give a defender 1-2 steps leeway of any contact.

The main point you're missing is that it IS a screen. There is no specific intent required for it to be a screen. It is a screen by nature of its effect.