Legal guarding position

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

...
In the original play B1 has infringed upon A1's cylinder of verticality by straddling A1's right leg. Even though A1 is in a somewhat off-balance position, A1 has the right to his/her cylinder of verticality.

So we can use this argument to say B1 has committed a foul as he runs by and trips over A1's outstretched leg, can't we? In fact, using your argument any player is perfectly entitled to stick his leg out and trip any other player whenever he likes, assuming time/distance constraints are met. If a player can outstrecth his legs to increase the size of this cylinder why can't he simply outstretch both arms to increase the size of his cylinder as well?

Anyway, even though it's not to be found in the rulebook I like your term - "cylinder of verticality". It reminds me of the "cone of silence".

[rainmaker]

Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

When B1 stradles A1's leg, B1 is infringing upon A1's verticality cylinder. A1 has the right to stand straight up.

Lets look at two plays that are slightly different from the original play but where the principal of verticality is the applicable rule.

Play 1: A1 has control of the ball. A1 is standing and not dribbling. A1 is being guarded by B1 from behind. A1 bends over and B1 bends over A1's back. A1 then straightens back up and there is contact between A1 and B1. Foul on B1.

Play 2: A1 has control of the ball. A1 is standing and not dribbling. A1 is being guarded by B1 from behind. A1 has not yet established a pivot foot. A1 drops the ball. A1 steps forward with his/her left foot (his/her rigth foot is now his/her piviot foot) and bends over to pick-up the ball. B1 bends over A1. A1 regains control of the ball and moves his/her left foot back near his/her right foot while resuming a straight up (not bending over anymore) position. There is contact between A1 and B1. Foul on B1.

In both plays B1 has infringed upon A1's cylinder of verticality.

In the original play B1 has infringed upon A1's cylinder of verticality by straddling A1's right leg. Even though A1 is in a somewhat off-balance position, A1 has the right to his/her cylinder of verticality.

In neither of your "test cases" is the foot of A1 out of the cylinder of the rest of A1's body. That's a crucial distinction, I think. I'm pretty sure that the last time we discussed this, we agreed that the verticality cylinder went up and down from the pelvis. If B1 makes contact, I think it's still a push on B1, but A1 doesn't get that space back once he/she has surrendered it.

[Adam]

Originally posted by tjchamp

So again I ask, does it make sense that veritcality applies to the area over the hips, as that is the NORMAL position referred to by blindzebra? If so, then foul in both situations described above go to B1, and foul on A1 in situation I originally described.

tjchamp, I'd say this is a good rule of thumb to go by. There may very well be an exception that I cannot anticipate, but I'd say it is generally a good way to go.

Perhaps MTD could show us where "cylinder of verticality" is defined in the rules book? Maybe rule 12-3-2-4-5-6-4-1?

Adam

[blindzebra]

Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

When B1 stradles A1's leg, B1 is infringing upon A1's verticality cylinder. A1 has the right to stand straight up.

Lets look at two plays that are slightly different from the original play but where the principal of verticality is the applicable rule.

Play 1: A1 has control of the ball. A1 is standing and not dribbling. A1 is being guarded by B1 from behind. A1 bends over and B1 bends over A1's back. A1 then straightens back up and there is contact between A1 and B1. Foul on B1.

Play 2: A1 has control of the ball. A1 is standing and not dribbling. A1 is being guarded by B1 from behind. A1 has not yet established a pivot foot. A1 drops the ball. A1 steps forward with his/her left foot (his/her rigth foot is now his/her piviot foot) and bends over to pick-up the ball. B1 bends over A1. A1 regains control of the ball and moves his/her left foot back near his/her right foot while resuming a straight up (not bending over anymore) position. There is contact between A1 and B1. Foul on B1.

In both plays B1 has infringed upon A1's cylinder of verticality.

In the original play B1 has infringed upon A1's cylinder of verticality by straddling A1's right leg. Even though A1 is in a somewhat off-balance position, A1 has the right to his/her cylinder of verticality.

No, in the origional play B1 MAINTAINED LGP in his/her VERTICAL CYLINDER, in your cases B1 did not.

Verticality is confined within the framework of the body, not the space above out-stretched arms or legs, so A1 had no right to the space above their outstretched leg as long as B1 got to that spot first and without contact.

[ChuckElias]

Originally posted by Dan_ref
Anyway, even though it's not to be found in the rulebook I like your term - "cylinder of verticality". It reminds me of the "cone of silence".

What?!?!

[davidw]

Originally posted by ChuckElias

What?!?!

"Cone of Silence" a mixed metaphor or mis-application of "Code of Silence"-- maybe. Equivalent to Dan's belief that Mark has inappropriately mixed "verticality" as covered in official books with "cylinder" as covered in camps/clinics etc. Both mis-applied/mixed. Am I right or wrong Dan?

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by ChuckElias

What?!?!

Don't tell me you can't hear me Chief

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by davidw

"Cone of Silence" a mixed metaphor or mis-application of "Code of Silence"-- maybe. Equivalent to Dan's belief that Mark has inappropriately mixed "verticality" as covered in official books with "cylinder" as covered in camps/clinics etc. Both mis-applied/mixed. Am I right or wrong Dan?

Like I'm that Smart!

It was just the old "reference old TV comedy shows that most people are too young to remember to get a cheap laugh out of the geezers" trick.

[davidw]

Originally posted by Dan_ref

Like I'm that Smart!

It was just the old "reference old TV comedy shows that most people are too young to remember to get a cheap laugh out of the geezers" trick.

ok, you got a big laugh out of me on that. I kinda liked my guess though.

[Edited by davidw on Apr 26th, 2004 at 02:45 PM]

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by davidw

ok, you got a big laugh out of me on that. I kinda liked my guess though.

[Edited by davidw on Apr 26th, 2004 at 02:45 PM]

I liked your guess too!

[rockyroad]

Hey Dan, I got it right away - I loved that show...as for all these guys who didn't catch it, well - I guess they all "Missed it by that much"...especially whoever it was that talked about the cylinder of verticality - what the heck is that???

[ChuckElias]

Originally posted by Dan_ref
Don't tell me you can't hear me Chief

Oh I can hear you as clear as Bernie Kopell's cheesy Russian accent.

I just couldn't find a jpeg of the cones in use!

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by ChuckElias

Oh I can hear you as clear as Bernie Kopell's cheesy Russian accent.

I just couldn't find a jpeg of the cones in use!

Sigh...you're supposed to say "I can't hear you Max!"

Go ahead...say it already!

BTW



Very disappointing....

(BTW, I always thought that vass a Chermaaahn ahksend, nein?)

[Hawks Coach]

Way back in my early days in the Navy, we had a shop supervisor who would call you outside for a "discussion." We took to calling that the cone of silence, and it was about as silent as the TV show's cone. He caught on to our little joke, and would call somebody by name when he was po'd and say "Jones!!! CONE!!!" That was even funnier to us than having come up with the concept in the first place.

Don't know why I saw fit to mention it her, you just brought back old memories . . .

[ChuckElias]

Originally posted by Dan_ref
BTW, I always thought that vass a Chermaaahn ahksend, nein?)

Yes, yes. Oh, I can't believe I screwed that up. I thought I was being clever enough by coming up with the Bernie Kopell reference. I guess I gotta get out the TV Guide and find out when the re-runs are on!