Fun With Expanding One's Primary ...
 

IAABO Make The Call Video

https://storage.googleapis.com/refqu...OEzzyTtQ%3D%3D

Was this a legal screen? Should the Lead expand coverage and rule on this contact on this play?

Two choices: The Lead should expand his coverage area and rule and illegal screen. The Lead should not expand his coverage area and make a ruling on this play.

My comment: The Lead should expand his coverage area and rule and illegal screen. Illegal screen by Red #34. Trail had a competitive matchup in her area (ball handler Red #21 and defender White #10) and couldn’t view the illegal screen. The Lead didn’t have a competitive matchup in his primary and should look beyond for a competitive matchup (the illegal screen) to help out his partner.

This should be basically easy for the lead. The player came from his area, watch them and see what they do. He has no other competitive matchup during this play. Looks like he is ball-watching.

Peace

Up To Something ...
 

Agree.

He should have known that she was "up to something" and should have "monitored" her until other players more likely to "do something" appeared in his primary.

This is a Connecticut prep school (home in dark jersey is an odd Connecticut prep school rule).

How many other schools have a Wyvern for a mascot?

Hope the Wyverns don't find out that somebody has culturally appropriated and hijacking their image as a mascot.

https://tse1.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP.O...=0&w=300&h=300

Not only should lead have taken this, he should have "pinched the paint" to have a better look at it.

And, heck, T's matchup isn't so close that she couldn't have seen the coming screen to rule on it. That would be a good crew-saving call.

Field Of Vision ...
 

Agree. The ball handler/defender matchup wasn't really that competitive, and the illegal screen was visible within her field of vision at her distance from the players.

And it wasn't exactly a subtle illegal screen.

I can't disagree with the above comments...yes, illegal screen. Yes, this is the L's to get.

This play is a perfect illustration of the point I often try to make that PCA's are about on-ball coverage. The T is on-ball on the perimeter. The L must cover anything like this anywhere on the court and away form the ball. Even if this occurred halfway between the top of the key and the center circle, the L is the one that has to cover it.

The Land Of Steady Habits ...
 

The perils of a two person game.

Welcome to my world.

https://live.staticflickr.com/3775/1...8029f778_m.jpg

That's true even in three-person. The on-ball official watches the player with the ball and the defender. The other two officials each watch the two matchups nearest them.

(and, yes, I recognize the math associated with "nearest" doesn't always work that way)

This has nothing to do with expanding coverage. The Lead is not even looking at his primary. He is ball watching. He's on one side of the basket looking directly over to where the ball is. He's not looking at any other matchups.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

The T appeared to be totally occupied with the matchup right in front of her, as she can be seen administering an intermittent "5 sec closely guarded count" on the ball handler. Can she see in her periphery that an IS had occurred? Should she have been expected to be accountable?
I agree with the posters who have asserted that the L needed to expand/come off his monitored area, which he did judging by where his gaze seemed to be. Let us assume that he saw the IS, why would he not kill the play? I would presume that he did not want to appear to be "fishing in someone else's pond". But he was ball-watching.
Cameron I am enlightened by your comment " PCA is about one-ball coverage ".
JRut I am enlightened by your comment on " following players moving from your primary area"; this concept is consistent with what we do in following a dribbler from our primary area when they drive to the basket away from us.
BobJenk. I concur with your assertion that the T should've seen this IS ; an experienced ref should be able to "chew gum and walk simultaneously".
Raymond's point of placing responsibility on the L to come get that foul is certainly not beyond what should be expected from a mindfully-engaged ref.
Billy, thanks for posting that vid!

Indeed. It does work in 3-person just the same, and, if the 3 are doing things right, a lot more of this kind of stuff doesn't get missed.

Can't disagree with that. But I know a lot of people that have had "stay in your primary" so beat into their heads that they don't dare go outside of it. In my training clinics for those wanting to work post-season, I try to impress upon them that primaries are first, not absolute, and second, mostly about on-ball coverage. It is easier to demonstrate the principle in a 2-person scenario and this play is a pretty good example of a play that demands the L both be looking off-ball and, at the same time, not limited to his "primary". I've bookmarked this video to incorporate into my training.

Agree with Bob, this should be easy call for L. Disagree with Bob, this is not a crew-saving call. There was no advantage gained by the offensive team, the screen did not work as planned and lead to an immediate scoring opportunity. Ultimately the girl they were screening for got the ball, much further from the basket than the offense was hoping for, while being guarded. This is a long way from a crew-saving call.

IAABO Survey Says …
 

Disclaimer: For IAABO eyes only. Below is not a NFHS interpretation, it's only an IAABO interpretation which obviously doesn't mean a hill of beans to most members of this Forum.

https://storage.googleapis.com/refqu...OEzzyTtQ%3D%3D

IAABO Play Commentary: Correct Answer: The Lead should expand his coverage area and rule and illegal screen..

This is an illegal screen. The screener has a stance wider than shoulder-width, was still moving, and did not give the opponent the time and distance needed when screening a player outside their visual field. (4-40-2c, 2d, 4-40-5)

These types of high post screens can pose a challenge to a 2-person crew. When the ball was passed to the sideline, the Trail official properly maintained focus on the ball handler/defender match-up near the sideline. In this situation, the Lead official needs to quickly assess where the competitive match-ups are on the court and determine where the greatest need is during the possession. In this case, the only other engaged competitive match-up at this moment (other than the ball handler/defender) was this screening situation.

Even though the screen technically occurs in the Trail's primary coverage area (PCA), officials must be willing to assist the partner in ruling on “off-ball” contact in the secondary/expanded coverage area (SCA) when the ball is in the partner’s PCA. (IAABO manual p. 20 Section 6.d) On this play, we encourage the Lead to expand their coverage and look "outside their area" to rule this illegal off-ball contact.

Here is the breakdown of the IAABO members that commented on the video: The Lead should expand his coverage area and rule and illegal screen 89% (including me). The Lead should not expand his coverage area and make a ruling on this play 11%.