Re: Clarification
 

In a situation like this, with the offender swinging his elbows, legal guarding posistion does not need to be estableshed in order for a player control foul to be called.

Quote:

If the defender is crowding the player with the ball, making it hard to move, that's what I call good defense.

Rule 4-44-5: "The offensive player whether on the floor or airborne, may not "clear out" or cause contact within the defender's vertical plane which is a foul."

Rule 4-44-6: "The defender may not "belly up" or use the lower part of the body or arms to cause contact outside his/her vertical plane which is a foul."

The offensive player may not use his elbows to "clear out," but the defensive player may not "belly up" either. It is not good defense, but, rather, poor officiating, if a player can "cause contact outside of his/her vertical plane" without being called for a foul. I see this all the time in HS games: A1 gets trapped and is slowly pushed off balance. Is a foul called? NO, that's just good defense. Instead, A1 is called for traveling.

Rule 4-23-3b: "The guard may move laterally or obliquely to maintain position, provided it is not toward the opponent when contact occurs."

Is it possible to contact a stationary opponent without moving toward him?

Also, Rule 4-27-3: "Similarly, contact which does not hinder the opponent from participating in normal defensive or offensive movements should be considered incidental."

Compare that with: "If the defender is crowding the player with the ball, making it hard to move, that's what I call good defense."

Pivoting is a normal offensive movement, and "crowding the player with the ball" hinders that movement.

[Edited by Eric Huechteman on Apr 20th, 2004 at 01:57 AM]

Pardon? You're saying that if a player with the ball pivots INTO a defender who has established a legal spot on the court, then the foul is on the defender? Don't think so. The defender can always legally establish a spot on the floor as close to the player as he can get, short of actual contact, as long as the defender gets to that spot before his opponent. Once the defender has established that legal spot, how could you possibly call a foul on them if an opponent pivots INTO their legal position? If you're gonna call anything, it has to be the other way around.

Eric,
No one said the defender was bellying up. Once again, if he's doing this, we have a foul before the elbow even makes contact, thus the elbow is incidental after-the-whistle contact (provided it's not flagrant or intentional). We're talking about a defender who is not breaking his vertical plane, but his right up agaist the offense. A stationary defender. The book says there is no distance requirement for playing defense on the player with the ball.

Eric, you can't back into defining a foul this way. You're right, pivoting is normal offensive movement, but so is driving to the hoop, shooting, etc. A defensive player's job is to hinder that movement, as long as it's done legally. If the defense is stationary, verticle, and in LGP, I don't see how you could possibly not call a pc foul when the offense uses his elbow to "clear out" space.

Re: Re: Clarification
 

I'm not talking about swinging elbows when I mention LGP, I'm talking about pivoting with the elbows out as in when the ball is properly chinned after a rebound or pass. These are different situations. Swinging elbows by a player with the ball is a violation, even without contact. If you pivot with your elbows out and do not make contact, there is no violation and no foul. If contact occurs, you have to determine who initiated the contact. If the defender runs into the elbow, who is the foul on? If both players are moving simulataneously, who is the foul on? In each case, you have to determine which player was acting in a manner entitled to by the rules.

Eric, when Jurassic and others use the word "crowding" they don't mean pushing or bumping. They just mean taking all the space that's right next to the player with the ball. The rule book makes it clear that with the ball near the chin and both elbows out, the elbows are illegal if there's contact. The defender is entitled to that space right next to the ball-handler.

This is important when you think about a double team. If the two defenders are taking up two-thirds of the ball-handler's immediate surroundings, there's not much choice for the ball-handler, and that's good defense. No pushing or bumping is needed to really screw up the offense. That kind of crowding is legal, and if elbows are introduced into the situation, they are illegal.

Crowding doesn't mean contact. It means getting so close that the offense has no room to move. If there is contact that has an effect on the play, then it's not crowding, it's pushing.

The definition of defense is to hinder the offenses movement. They are only restricted to doing it without creating contact...not by being required to give the offense room to move.

This an extreamly good subject to address because I had 2 cases in one game last weekend(not that far apart). Case #1 A1 rebounds the ball comes straight down contacting B2 with his elbow to the shoulder knocking B2 to the floor no foul or violation in my judgement Case #2 A1 comes down with the ball swinging away contacts B1 side of the head so I call a T (the famous coach complaint "call it both ways")

Hmmm, ball's live. . . illegal contact. . . Could you have something other than a T here?

Nope, it's not a T. If A1 <b>contacts</b> B1 during a live ball with the elbow, it should be a player control foul, or possibly an intententional or flagrant personal foul, dependant on the premeditation or excessive violence involved(your judgement). Contact with the elbow during a dead ball would be a T(again your judgement). Swinging the elbow(s) and missing during a live ball is a violation. Deliberately swinging the elbow(s)and missing during a dead ball could also be a T, if you judged that as an unsporting act.

HA!! Beatcha! :p

I, too, could have posted a cursory "you're wrong", and decreased my response time. Instead, I took the high road and decided to inform and educate the masses on the proper application of this rule. And the thanks that I get for doing so is some churl essentially saying "Nanny, Nanny, Boo Boo" to me. Well, some day you will recognize my brilliance and give me my proper due!

Hey, that "MTD Sr. post reply" course that I took is actually taking hold, I see. :D

Instead of spoonfeeding eager young officials, I prefer to use a Socratic approach. I did not merely post "You're wrong". I left clues like breadcrumbs and then simply asked a question.

Plus I cut down on my post time! :)