Too Wide ...
 

IAABO recently released a video play summary commentary on a garden variety block-charge situation.

Some IAABO members had commented that the defender's stance as being "too wide" to be considered legal.

IAABO responded that, “This is not the case. There is no provision for the defender's feet to be within shoulder width like there is in the screening rule”.

While true that the phrase “stance approximately shoulder width apart” is only stated in rule on screening, doesn’t the phrase “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” in the guarding rule imply the same purpose and intent of the (shoulder width) screening rule? There is also similar language in the contact rule.

4-40-2-D: The screener must stay within his/her vertical plane with a stance approximately shoulder width apart.

4-23-1 Guarding is the act of legally placing the body in the path of an offensive opponent. There is no minimum distance required between the guard and opponent, but the maximum is 6 feet when closely guarded. 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.

10-7-1-Contact: A player must not hold, push, charge, trip or impede the progress of an opponent by extending arm(s), shoulder(s), hip(s) or knee(s), or by bending his/her body into other than a normal position; nor use any rough tactics.

Is IAABO correct in that in a garden variety block-charge situation, a defender’s stance cannot be “too wide”?

Where did the contact occur? If it was to the torso of the defender, I'm not concerned about the width of the leg spread.

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

You beat me to it. Screens and block-charge plays, it is where the contact took place. If the contact is in the middle of the torso, then the legs play no role to me whatsoever. If the legs are within the width of the frame but the arms are outside the frame, I am only going to call a foul based on where the contact took place, not with some other part of the body that could technically be illegal but there is no contact.

Peace

Forget about whether an interpretation came from an IAABO Interpreter or the Interpreter of a LOA and remember that I am a member of IAABO and have sat on IAABO National Committees and have been the Interpreter of an LOA. I will address IAABO vs. NFHS & NCAA in a separate thread at a later date.

The Guarding and Screening Rules are two different yet very similar Rules and yet for all intents and purposes, except of some minor tweaking since the turn of the Century (which I will ignore for the time being for reasons I do not want to discuss at this time), the Guarding and Screen Rules been the same for well over 60 years going back to the NBC Rules, then onto the NFHS Basketball Rules and NCAA Men's Basketball Rules Committees, and then the NCAA Women's Basketball Rules Committees.

The width of the Player's feet are of significance ONLY when setting Screens. The width of the Player's feet are of no significance when Obtaining/Establishing a LGP and thereafter maintaining a LGP.

Example: A1 is a 6'-00" PG standing just outside of the Top of the Key in Team A's Front Court. B1 is a 6'-09" Center and is standing at the middle of the Free Throw Line just inside the Free Throw Lane; he is standing with his feet at a width outside the width of his shoulders, facing A1. B1 has Obtained/Established a LGP against A1. A1 then starts to dribble toward B1. B1 does not move his feet or body and keeps his arms extended straight up. A1 attempts to dribble around B1 on B1's left side and trips over B1's feet. Question: Has an Infraction of the Rules occurred? If so, what is the Infraction and who committed it? RULING: At a minimum, no Infraction has occurred. If an Infraction has occurred it is one of two types: 1) A PCF by A1 if B1 is displaced by A1's contact, or 2) a possible Traveling Violation by A1.

MTD, Sr.

Torso ...
 

From IAABO: "As the ball handler jumps she contacts the defender in the upper left of the defender's torso."

Fully agree.

As Dirt ...
 

The Nineteenth Century?

Extending Knees ...
 

How about this citation?

10-7-1-Contact: A player must not hold, push, charge, trip or impede the progress of an opponent by extending arm(s), shoulder(s), hip(s) or knee(s), or by bending his/her body into other than a normal position; nor use any rough tactics.

Billy:

Draw a Line (Line AKH) from B1's left ankle joint (Point A) through his left knee (Point K) to his left leg hip joint (Point H). If, in three-dimensional space, Line AKH is a straight line then there has not been an infraction of NFHS R10-S7-A1 by B1.

MTD, Sr.

Pythagoras' Theorem ...
 

Sounds like Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. personally knew Greek philosopher Pythagora.

Guarding ...
 

Well played Mark T. DeNucci, Sr., providing an answer that I would only expect from an engineer.

Now give this citation a try:

4-23-1 Guarding is the act of legally placing the body in the path of an offensive opponent. There is no minimum distance required between the guard and opponent, but the maximum is 6 feet when closely guarded. 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.

Got any mathematical formula to explain away this citation?

Check out the Slope-Intercept Formula (y=mx+b), b would be the point of contact.

Of course, I'm no match against the mathematical prowess of an engineer, my academic background is mostly in geology, and as we all know, geology is "the Kardashian of science".

https://tse4.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP.J...AA&pid=Api&P=0

Billy:

Bonnie Jean thanks you for the box of Good and Plenty, I do not like them but she loves them. That said...

For the red of NFHS R4-S23-A1 (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.) to apply, B1 must bend his/her knee out into A1 as A1 attempts to dribble by him/her. 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.

MTD, Sr.

Extending ...
 

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?

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DiVE7iHUEAAEX8T.jpg

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?

Billy:

1) The picture you showed is the stance that the NFHS Softball, NCAA/CCA Softball, and USA Softball Umpiring Manuals want the PU to use. A stance that Mark, Jr., and I have never used and Mark umpires NCAA Div. I softball.

2a) From the Situation that described, if B1 took this stance in Obtaining his LGP and never moved any part of his body, and then A1 while attempting to dribble around B1 tripped over B1's left foot: What question has B1 did that was Illegal?

2b) If B1 moves his left foot out at the last moment and trips A1, then I would agree with you that B1 has most likely committed a Blocking Foul. But the Guarding Rule, unlike the Screening Rule, has no prohibition on how wide a Defender's feet may be when Obtaining a LGP.

MTD, Sr.

Extended Leg ...
 

He extended a "leg into the path of an opponent".

4-23-1 Guarding is the act of legally placing the body in the path of an offensive opponent. There is no minimum distance required between the guard and opponent, but the maximum is 6 feet when closely guarded. 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.

The verb "extends" implies a movement by B1 into A1 as A1 attempts to dribble by B1. But B1 simply taking the stance as in the picture and never moving his foot, leg, or knee does not meet the criteria of "extends".

MTD, Sr.