PC Foul called - Lowering the shoulder or not LGP (Video)

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by crosscountry55

Fair point but do you have an opinion on this play? The title inferred a lowering of the shoulder (which implies a charge and responsibility on the offense regardless of LGP), or a case of LGP being established. I didn’t see either.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I've yet to see "lowering the shoulder" as a reason for a foul in any rulebook. Every person who is running has lowered his/her shoulder to some degree. They'd fall backwards if not....try to run fast without leaning forward.

I don't have the defender in LGP...block.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

I've yet to see "lowering the shoulder" as a reason for a foul in any rulebook. Every person who is running has lowered his/her shoulder to some degree. They'd fall backwards if not....try to run fast without leaning forward.

I don't have the defender in LGP...block.

I have yet to see anything that suggests a defender like this is not in LGP. He is doing all the things required and gets run into. PC foul all day and twice on Sunday.

Peace

[Kelvin green]

I’m with JRut... what did the defender do wrong? In many plays we assume that the defender is wrong but why? What we need to do is officiate from the presumption that defenders play legally. ( we officiate the defense) ... we should never penalize good defense but it happens all too often....in this play the defender has done nothing wrong and gets displaced.

I like this call and think it is exactly what needed to be called...

[ilyazhito]

Correct call. This is not football, where an offensive player can legally stiff-arm or drive a shoulder into a defender to put him on the ground. By the same token, lack of LGP does not give the offensive player license to initiate illegal contact and get away with it scot-free. This is why there is an exception to the restricted area rule for when an offensive player uses an unnatural motion to illegally contact a defender (using a shoulder, forearm, or knee to create separation or knock the defender down). I would apply the same thinking anywhere else on the court, and call the player control foul on blue here.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I have yet to see anything that suggests a defender like this is not in LGP. He is doing all the things required and gets run into. PC foul all day and twice on Sunday.

Peace

Originally Posted by Kelvin green

I’m with JRut... what did the defender do wrong? In many plays we assume that the defender is wrong but why? What we need to do is officiate from the presumption that defenders play legally. ( we officiate the defense) ... we should never penalize good defense but it happens all too often....in this play the defender has done nothing wrong and gets displaced.

I like this call and think it is exactly what needed to be called...

I have the dribbler getting head/shoulders past the defender based on the direction the dribbler was moving and the defender lost LGP and need to get back in the path facing the opponent to reestablish it. Instead the defender was running beside the dribbler and never got back to LGP.

[ChuckS]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

I have the dribbler getting head/shoulders past the defender based on the direction the dribbler was moving and the defender lost LGP and need to get back in the path facing the opponent to reestablish it. Instead the defender was running beside the dribbler and never got back to LGP.

If we agree that the defender lost LGP, can't this still be a foul on the offense? Rule 4-23-1 states "Guarding is the act of legally placing the body in the path of an offensive opponent". I interpret that to mean that LGP is required to obtain a charge call. But not all PC fouls are charges.

If A1 grabs a rebound and goes full speed the length of the court, with B1 alongside him, but having never obtained LGP, and A1, frustrated with B1's close proximity, shoves him, that is a PC foul on A1, correct?

[deecee]

Play 1 - ideally a CNC otherwise PC.
Play 2 - PC

[crosscountry55]

Originally Posted by ChuckS

If we agree that the defender lost LGP, can't this still be a foul on the offense? Rule 4-23-1 states "Guarding is the act of legally placing the body in the path of an offensive opponent". I interpret that to mean that LGP is required to obtain a charge call. But not all PC fouls are charges.

If A1 grabs a rebound and goes full speed the length of the court, with B1 alongside him, but having never obtained LGP, and A1, frustrated with B1's close proximity, shoves him, that is a PC foul on A1, correct?

Your example is absolutely a PCF. Despite not having established LGP, B1 did not illegally impede A1. Given that, he was entitled to his space on the floor as much as A1 was entitled to his. Thus if A1 shoves B1 out of his entitled space (even if both are moving), foul on A1.

Regarding the OP, in my opinion the defender did not have LGP and illegally impeded the ball handler. But for the sake of your question, if we assume that the defender did have LGP and did NOT illegally impede the ball handler, then we have two judgment options: 1) incidental contact, no call, 2) the ball handler illegally contacted the defender (forearm, shoulder, push-off, or whatever you saw), PCF. If given only these two choices, I would opt for incidental contact, as I didn't see anything particularly egregious on the part of the ball handler.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by ChuckS

If we agree that the defender lost LGP, can't this still be a foul on the offense? Rule 4-23-1 states "Guarding is the act of legally placing the body in the path of an offensive opponent". I interpret that to mean that LGP is required to obtain a charge call. But not all PC fouls are charges.

If A1 grabs a rebound and goes full speed the length of the court, with B1 alongside him, but having never obtained LGP, and A1, frustrated with B1's close proximity, shoves him, that is a PC foul on A1, correct?

LGP is not required to draw a charge. LGP is required to draw a charge only if the defender is moving or jumping. A stationary defender doesn't need LGP.

And yes, it can still be a foul on the offense even if the defender is moving and doesn't have LGP....but not a charge. It would have to be a foul for the offense using an arm, for example, to shove the defender away. Body to body is a block/charge and without an extended arm, that is a what this is.

In your example, sure, that is a PC for the shove. But if, instead, A1 is trying to alter course to go towards the basket, that defender has to have LGP in order be moving in that manner. The defender doesn't, so it is a block.

[Pantherdreams]

Areas where we have agreement:

- You need LGP to draw a charge while moving or jumping.
- The offense can commit a variety of PC fouls that aren't charges.
- Offense initiating the contact is not a defining factor in which call we make.

Area's where we seem to have trouble reaching agreement:
- If and when the defender established/lost LGP.
- If we are officiating the defense the what the defender did wrong.
- When and which path the defender is/should be guarding.

Follow up question:

If A1 is driving toward a sideline, and the defensive posture B1 wishes to take is to maintain their torso and feet squared to the path to the rim.Are we saying: a) They would have LGP is the offense was attacking the basket? b) they do not have LGP if the offense is attacking the sideline? c) and now if the offense chooses to change their angle to a diagonal or an attempt to" turn the corner" and angles into the defense, are we saying that contact which occurs must be a block or no call on the defense (exempting a shove or push off of some kind) because we need them to re-established LGP in this new path too?

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

PC Foul called - Lowering the shoulder or not LGP

Originally Posted by crosscountry55

The title inferred a lowering of the shoulder (which implies a charge and responsibility on the offense regardless of LGP),

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

I've yet to see "lowering the shoulder" as a reason for a foul in any rulebook. Every person who is running has lowered his/her shoulder to some degree.

Over many years, why have we seen many, many references to "lowering the shoulder" here on the Forum in reference to player control charging fouls?

Did I miss something when I first learned high school rules?

I remember talking about legal guarding position, feet, verticality, movement, airborne players, torsos, ducking, etc., but I don't remember discussing lowering shoulders (other than getting head and shoulders past the defender).

Was I absent that day?

Was it "Senior Skip Day"?

[crosscountry55]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Over many years, why have we seen many, many references to "lowering the shoulder" here on the Forum in reference to player control charging fouls?



Did I miss something when I first learned high school rules?



Was I absent that day?



Was it "Senior Skip Day"?

I’m with you Billy but that’s why I said lowering the shoulder (in the context of the OP) implies a charge. I never said it guarantees it, for as you correctly state there is no specific rules coverage for lowering of the shoulder.

Looks like as a forum we’re professionally split on who had greater responsibility for the contact and whether LGP requirements were met. It was a close play, so I guess that’s ok.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by crosscountry55

... there is no specific rules coverage for lowering of the shoulder.

Could it be some colloquial rule of thumb to help officials make a correct block/charge call?

If so, can it be shared with the rest of us, I've never heard about it in my high school games here in my little corner of Connecticut?

[bucky]

Should have been a no call.

[JRutledge]

Play #2: Another one


Peace