Legal or not???

[BktBallRef]

Originally posted by TravelinMan
Jurassic - yes, moving screen is violation. It is a foul only if there is contact. I believe some of the posts talked about contact in moving screen. Doesn't have to be contact.

Gotta disagree with you, Traveling Man. A moving screen is not a violation. I agree that if there's illegal contact, it's a foul. If there's no contact, it's nutin'.

[Rich]

Originally posted by TravelinMan

Thanks Mick. Let me try it. Learning how to use features. Jurassic - yes, moving screen is violation. It is a foul only if there is contact. I believe some of the posts talked about contact in moving screen. Doesn't have to be contact.

Hoo boy.

[rainmaker]

Originally posted by bob jenkins
So, watch B1 (referee the defense). If A1 is illegally stopping B1 from performing normal defensive actions, call the foul. IF B1 is content to play behind A1 and just stand there, there's nothing to call.

The question is what is defined as "illegally stopping B1 from performing normal defensive actions," not just in PGCougar's situation, but in other cases, such as Camron and I have been disagreeing about.

[Adam]

Juulie, I think we have to referee the defense. If illegal contact is preventing the defender from going where she wants to go, call it. If B1 gives up and isn't even attempting to do anything, I've got nothing.

Also, I'm still waiting for the rule reference that says a moving screen without contact is violation. That would be a nightmare to officiate.

[Camron Rust]

Originally posted by rainmaker


1 Okay. A1 sets good position, holds, B2 comes in, makes contact, but doesn't foul. Now, is A1 required to just stand there while B2 goes around? No movement allowed?

It depends. If B2 is trying to get to A2 (the shooter beyond A1), A1 can't be moving if B2 makes contact unless it is the same path and direction.

However, if B2 is simply trying to front or defend A1, probably no foul...just working for position. It all depends on where B2 is trying to go.

Originally posted by rainmaker

2. So, again after contact, A1 steps back thus breaking contact, and slightly sideways, why isn't that a new legal screen? A1 could pull this maneuver and leave time and distance, since B2 isn't moving very fast, and not much time and distance is required. Why not?

Could be a new legal screen. Time and distance apply. However, if there's any component of movement in the lateral direction at the time of contact, it's not a legal screen.

[PGCougar]

Originally posted by TravelinMan
My question is where is B2? Guarding A2 on jumper? Or are they in a zone? Why isnt team B playing tighter defense on the A2 wing jump shooter? Let's keep this simple.

No zone - it was man-to-man. A2 was exceptionally gifted and had an excellent quick first step. She beat B2 every time on the dribble penetration from wing. The reason for my original question stemmed from the fact that B1 was really struggling to get around A1 who was posting up but then moving around blocking out B1's attempt to help on A2's drive and jumper once she had beaten B2.

Team B should have adjusted by providing help from up top or sagging B2 off A2 more, but that's another issue altogether.

[ChuckElias]

Originally posted by Snaqwells
Also, I'm still waiting for the rule reference that says a moving screen without contact is violation.

Don't hold your breath!!

[Adam]

Originally posted by ChuckElias

Don't hold your breath!!

Wish you would have told me sooner.

[rainmaker]

Originally posted by Camron Rust

It depends. If B2 is trying to get to A2 (the shooter beyond A1), A1 can't be moving if B2 makes contact unless it is the same path and direction.

However, if B2 is simply trying to front or defend A1, probably no foul...just working for position. It all depends on where B2 is trying to go.

Could be a new legal screen. Time and distance apply. However, if there's any component of movement in the lateral direction at the time of contact, it's not a legal screen.

These answers are vey helpful, and I appreciate what you're saying.

[TravelinMan]

Oops....Please disregard my earlier comments re moving screen. It must have been late and I must have been tired when I posted that! It is not a violation.

[Adam]

Originally posted by TravelinMan
Oops....Please disregard my earlier comments re moving screen. It must have been late and I must have been tired when I posted that! It is not a violation.

[N_Stripes]

[i]Originally posted by PGCougar
No zone - it was man-to-man. A2 was exceptionally gifted and had an excellent quick first step. She beat B2 every time on the dribble penetration from wing. The reason for my original question stemmed from the fact that B1 was really struggling to get around A1 who was posting up but then moving around blocking out B1's attempt to help on A2's drive and jumper once she had beaten B2.

Team B should have adjusted by providing help from up top or sagging B2 off A2 more, but that's another issue altogether. [/B]

Based on all the great comments and visuals (The BC helped), I still think we have an illegal screen. Especially now that PGCouger clarifies that B1 was struggling to get around A1 in an attempt to get to A2. But like I said, I think it's camoflauged(sp?) whether, intentional camo or not.