Now now. Let's be real. In realtime bang-bang plays like this many times you don't have time or remember to "count" the steps. We do go with an approximation or feel. You get to count the steps if you see the whole action happening in your head in advance. We don't get that luxury many times.

Decades ...
 

Fair point, but it's more the way many of us (as well as coaches, players, and fans) have seen it called for decades in games we've worked, and in games we've observed.

Right or wrong, ball handling screeners seem to be customarily treated differently than screeners without the ball.

Many of us seem to pay more attention to the third sentence of the comment rather than the first two sentences.

COMMENT: Screening principles apply to the dribbler who attempts to cut off an opponent who is approaching in a different path from the rear. In this case, the dribbler must allow such opponent a maximum of two steps or an opportunity to stop or avoid contact. When both the dribbler and the opponent are moving in exactly the same path and same direction, the player behind is responsible for contact which results if the player in front slows down or stops.

That's because customarily, the primary function of a screener is to get in somebody's way, which often leads to contact. Customarily, the ballhandler is occupied doing other things, but on the rare occasion that it happens, make the call and move on.


"Sometimes, you have to just referee."

Overly Officious Official ...
 

While, by rule, a ball handler may have to be treated as a screener, I have never seen a ball handler called for a player control (illegal screen) blocking foul in over thirty-eight years of officiating (added to years of playing, coaching, and observing).

Player control fouls are usually called for a ball handler plowing into a defender, not for a defender plowing into a ball handler from the rear.

If I ever call this, I'm not looking forward to explaining it to the coach, even if I whip out my rulebook and prove that I'm correct.

One fairly common illegal screen by dribbler is when the dribbler is handing off a pass and screens illegally by sticking out his butt etc....

That's why, at some levels, it's been a POE (at least informally, if not formally).

From Behind ...
 

Agree. But after the handoff he's no longer a ball handler, and any exception or "comment" to the screening rule would no longer apply.

My posts have all referred to one ball handler and one defender, and the defender is always approaching from behind.

Like a dribbler who changes direction and slows down in an attempt to run the offense and is plowed into by a defender from behind, or a dribbler who changes direction and slows down to get his footwork established before a shot attempt and is plowed into by a defender from behind.

I've never seen these called a player control foul.

True, but this screen often happens before the ball is transferred.

Some assumptions to be made here.

1. If the dribbler can "sense" the defender, I am going to assume that the defender is following so close that their paths do overlap somewhat. With that, if the dribbler moves "more" into the path and stops, I have a foul on the defense.

2. If it is 100% clear that the offense made the intentional act to "screen" the defense and their paths are clearly different, I will call a foul on the offense. This threshold is pretty high though and very unlikely to play out.

3. If both the defense and offense are unaware of each others movements, this can be incidental.

Exactly my point and what i was trying to say/use as an example. Perhaps I did it poorly.

I've never EVER seen this called by an official at any game that I have watched or worked. Not one time.

I had almost the exact play as the OP in the playoffs, HS, last year with one exception. The dribbler immediately moved into the path, less than two steps, but the kicker was he even tried to backup a step so there was no possible way for the defender to avoid contact.

Foul on the dribbler, we went the other way.

Beep, Beep, Beep ...
 

Good call. I'm not sure that I would have made the same call, not because I disagree with the interpretation, but because it's such an odd call to properly react to in a bang bang situation.

The "backup a step" may have helped.

Indeed, backing up is waaaaaay different. In that case, it is a PC foul...every...single...time.;)

I agree 100%!

A sudden stop for no other reason isn't any different...both are designed to do the same thing.