I had a situation this weekend where the player with the ball has a defender playing him extremely aggressively and tight. The offensive player gets the ball at his chest and gets his elbows out to get himself some space. I've been taught that if the elbows stay in the framework of the body as the player pivots you have no foul, even though there is contact with the defender. Much the same as a rebounder chinning the ball and creating space. Yes, excessive swinging is a violation but what are your thoughts on this type of play. It's not popular when when of those elbows makes contact.

As I envision this, I have a foul. If the offense inititates contact, and it's deemed to be illegal (elbow contact has a smaller threshold for this, IMO), foul. The defender is entitled to his spot, no matter how close it is to the offensive player's spot. Find another way to create space.

I have trouble with this one, too, Rick. What I've been told is that if the elbows create much space, it's a foul, just as if the offender had pushed with the shoulder or forearm. However, I've also been told that the elbow rule supercedes the foul rule, and if the elbows are swung separately from the body it's a violation. If the body is moving, too, then there's no call. I tend to prefer the foul scenario with the addition that if there's any intent to use the elbow as a projectile, it's a T. But I don't call it real consistently, either.

Your point is well taken. What's your take on 4-24-8a, if it describes what is illegal but if its not in excess of the rest of the body as it rotates is it then deemed legal?

My understanding is that the threshold for a non-contact violation is different than for a contact foul.

See, that's the big question. Here's how I wish I would call it:

1) if there's no contact, judge whether the swinging of the elbow is in excess of the rotation of the body, then either violation or nothing. Unless I judge that there was an intent to elbow someone in particular, which just happened to miss, then I've got a T for unsportsmanlike.

2) if there's contact, that displaces or merits a call because of the amount of contact, then it's a foul of the personal kind. If it appears that there was an intent to harm, and it connects, it's flagrant.

Man it looks so simple when it's in the pixels. Not nearly this easy on the floor.

That is describing a violation. When there is no contact, you call the violation. If there is contact, after and part of the elbow swing, you can call the violatoin or a foul since both have occured.

Clearing out space with the elbows is a foul when contact occurs.

Clarification
 

If player with ball swings elbows outside of body movement, it is a violation. If player with ball pivots with elbows out, ball at chin, then no violation. If player makes contact with defender with elbows, then foul determination follows normal guidelines, including whether or not defender has established legal guarding position.

I'm good with excessive elbow swinging as a violation (no contact) and for calls involving intent. I'm struggling with a player that pivots with their arms in a passive elbows in style vs. a player pivoting with the elbows out. Does the offense have a right to that space or can the defense crowd in to deny it. The offense is trying to maintain their space using basketball moves not lash out with the intent of injury.

The defensive player can occupy any spot on the floor not previously occupied. If the elbows violate that spot, pc foul. Once again, A1 needs to find another way to create space.

We must remember that not all contact is a foul.

Rule 4-27-1 states: "The mere fact that contact occurs does not constitute a foul."

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

From these two articles, I infer (possibly incorrectly) that if I contact a defensive player with my elbows without putting him at a disadvantage (and not flagrantly), this does not constitute a foul.

Of course, to make things more difficult, Rule 4-24-6 states that: "The extension of the elbows when the hands are on the hips or when the hands are held hear the chest or when the arms are held more or less horizontally are examples of the illegal positions used." Does this also apply, however, to a person controlling the ball?...

Eric,
The original post has the offensive player "creating" space with contact. This is, in my book, the definition of advantage. Find another way to create space.

Respectfully, I disagree. In nearly every situation I have seen, the offensive player is creating space that he should have anyway. (The overzealous defensive player is leaning in on the player with the ball.)

In HS, though, I do agree there should be a call, one way or the other. If the defensive player is crowding the player with the ball, making it difficult to move, it's a call against the defense. If the offensive player is trying to make room to pass or to get out of a trap, it's a call on the offense.

If the defense is leaning, it's a foul before we get to the elbow. If the defense is merely "crowding," by which I mean maintaining an established position right next to the offensive player. There is no requirement to give the offensive player space. Therefore, if he's creating space by illegal contact, it's a foul.

What do you mean by "space that he should have anyway?" By what rule "should" it be there?

Like I said, if the defender is leaning, he does not have LGP, and is most likely responsible for any contact. But that wasn't the premise of the original post. I don't care if the defender is touching the offensive player with his chest, as long as he is vertical and in LGP. Creating space is a foul if it's done with illegal contact.

There are only three situations where your statement can be true and none of them apply. Basically, no player owns a space they don't already occupy unless...
<LI>they are airborne and that space was open when they jumped
<LI>they are moving without the ball and the opponent doesn't allow time and distance
<LI>that space is above them (verticality).


Aside from these, the have the right to nothing.

If the defensive player was already making contact that has not been determined to be a foul, additional contact from the offense doesn't make it so.



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