What is the call?

[onetime1]

Dribbler is in transition with defensive player running / trailing near half court. Offensive player can sense the defensive player is closing fast so dribbler on purpose swerves in path and "slams" on the brakes and gets knocked to the ground and trampled. Whatcha got?

[SD Referee]

Originally Posted by onetime1

Dribbler is in transition with defensive player running / trailing near half court. Offensive player can sense the defensive player is closing fast so dribbler on purpose swerves in path and "slams" on the brakes and gets knocked to the ground and trampled. Whatcha got?

As the official, I have no idea what a player can and cannot "sense". I have a foul on the defense. Seems pretty easy to me. I'm not trying to figure out what the players are thinking. I'm going off what I can see in that situation.

[bob jenkins]

The offense is trying to screen, and the player with the ball is given no more protection than a player without the ball. Foul on the offense, or play on (assuming the screening requirements were not met).

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

The offense is trying to screen, and the player with the ball is given no more protection than a player without the ball. Foul on the offense, or play on.

It does sound like a screen, but the player behind is responsible for the contact.

4-40: Screen
ART. 2 To establish a legal screening position:
c. The screener must be stationary, except when both the screener and opponent are moving in the same path and the same direction.
ART. 6 When screening an opponent who is moving in the same path and direction as the screener, the player behind is responsible if contact is made because the player in front slows up or stops and the player behind
overruns his/her opponent.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

It does sound like a screen, but the player behind is responsible for the contact.

[/I]

This wasn't a "same path and direction" play.

From the OP: "dribbler on purpose swerves in path and "slams" on the brakes "

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

This wasn't a "same path and direction" play. From the OP: "dribbler on purpose swerves in path and "slams" on the brakes "

If it wasn't same path and direction there wouldn't have been a collision when he slammed on the brakes (the "accident" would have been avoided).

Wait, I guess it could have been T-Bone accident?

I would like to see the play.

[SD Referee]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

This wasn't a "same path and direction" play.

From the OP: "dribbler on purpose swerves in path and "slams" on the brakes "

You don't know that the dribbler moved into the line of the defense and stopped on purpose to get a foul. They might have had other ideas.

[Raymond]

If the dribbler moves into the path of the defender, then screening rules apply as far as time and distance. If the dribbler and defender are on the same path, then the defender is responsible for contact if the dribbler stops.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by onetime1

Dribbler is in transition with defensive player running / trailing near half court. Offensive player can sense the defensive player is closing fast so dribbler on purpose swerves in path and "slams" on the brakes and gets knocked to the ground and trampled. Whatcha got?

How many steps did the defensive player take after the dribbler got in his path?

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Raymond

How many steps did the defensive player take after the dribbler got in his path?

After changing direction, and subsequently establishing a new path and direction, were the dribbler and the defender now both traveling in the same path and direction?

If so, I don't think that the number of steps matters:

COMMENT: 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.

If not, I think that the number of steps does matter because screening principles apply:

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.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

After changing direction, and subsequently establishing a new path and direction, were the dribbler and the defender now both traveling in the same path and direction?



If so, I don't think that the number of steps matters:



COMMENT: 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.



If not, I think that the number of steps does matter because screening principles apply:



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.

It makes a difference as far as how soon the collision occurred afterwards. If he got in his path and stopped without giving the defender two steps to adjust between the time he got in his path and the time they collided, it's a foul on the screener. If he moved into the path and the defender got two or more steps before the collision, then if it's on the defense.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Raymond

It makes a difference as far as how soon the collision occurred afterwards. If he got in his path and stopped without giving the defender two steps to adjust between the time he got in his path and the time they collided, it's a foul on the screener. If he moved into the path and the defender got two or more steps before the collision, then if it's on the defense.

Ay, there’s the rub! (Hamlet, William Shakespeare)

Agree, both reasonable, and correct, but there aren't too many of us who are going to count steps and call a player control blocking (illegal screen) foul on 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.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Ay, there’s the rub! (Hamlet, William Shakespeare)

Agree, both reasonable, and correct, but there aren't too many of us who are going to count steps and call a player control blocking (illegal screen) foul on 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.

That collision is going to be almost immediately after the change in path for it too be on the offense. Maybe we should be checking ourselves on this type of play to make sure we aren't unfairly penalizing the defense.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Ay, there’s the rub! (Hamlet, William Shakespeare)

Agree, both reasonable, and correct, but there aren't too many of us who are going to count steps and call a player control blocking (illegal screen) foul on 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.

That doesn't read like the OP -- which was near half court (a shot is unlikely here, and if there is one, it's a straight ahead launch), an "on-purpose" swerve and "slamming on the brakes".

[CJP]

Originally Posted by onetime1

Dribbler is in transition with defensive player running / trailing near half court. Offensive player can sense the defensive player is closing fast so dribbler on purpose swerves in path and "slams" on the brakes and gets knocked to the ground and trampled. Whatcha got?

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.