Kim Mulkey at it again

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

In my high school game, if I saw it, I would be unsure of intentional, might depend on what happened in the previous thirty-eight and a half minutes, and of course, we don't have access to a game monitors in high school for such situations. I had to view the video several times to decide that the contact was a split second after the technical foul whistle, and thus during a dead ball, a very split second. Of course the whistle may have trailed the act that caused as technical foul to be charged.

So I watched it again, but assumed that there was no technical foul charged, just looked at the "train wreck" collision.

Is this a screen (delaying or preventing an opponent from reaching a desired position), or is this guarding (placing the body in the path of an offensive opponent)? Does it matter? With both screening and guarding a moving opponent (without the ball), time and distance are factors to be considered. In either case, White did not give Blue time and distance. Blocking foul.

Just looking at Blue, she had her head turned to her left (didn't see it coming) just before the collision, so in my opinion, no intentional foul here. A player who is screened outside her visual field may make contact and if running rapidly, the contact may be severe, especially with no time and distance given by the screener.

Can one illegally "blow through" an already illegal screen (or illegal guarding)?