Too Wide ...

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

B1, standing completely still with his/her knee locked so that his/her leg is in a straight line from ankle joint to hip joint cannot be an infraction of NFHS R4-S23-A1. And has been already stipulated the width of the feet only apply in the Screening Rule.

So a defender who guards an opponent by extending a leg into the path of said opponent (garden variety block/charge play) in this manner (stance wider than shoulder, knees locked, legs straight) at the last "legal" second is legal if contact occurs?

Originally Posted by Raymond

If contact is to a leg that is outside of the vertical plane, I'm calling a trip/block.

4-23-1: ... Every player is entitled to a spot on the playing court provided such player gets there first without illegally contacting an opponent. A player who extends an arm, shoulder, hip or leg into the path of an opponent is not considered to have a legal position if contact occurs.

So if one gets there "first" (when time and distance is not a factor), it doesn't matter what one's stance is?

2004-05 NFHS Casebook: 10.6.1 Situation E: B1 attempts to steal the ball from stationary A1 who is holding the ball. B1 misses the ball and falls to the floor. In dribbling away, A1 contacts B1's leg, loses control of the ball and falls to the floor. Ruling: No infraction or foul has occurred and play continues. Unless B1 made an effort to trip or block A1, he/she is entitled to a position on the court even if it is momentarily lying on the floor after falling down.

Isn't there a difference between a player "passively" and momentarily lying on the floor after falling down, and a defender "actively" (effort) guarding a ball handler by standing in their path in such a manner (stance wider than shoulder, knees locked, legs straight) to misdirect them, or by attempting to "take" a charge?