Not even sure how to explain this one, but I will give it a whirl. Player A1 has ball, right leg is extended in front of body, and right foot is pivot. A1 has all weight on back foot. Defender B1 then straddles A1's right foot, but remains vertical. A1 then pivots her weight back onto the front foot causing contact with B1 sufficient that a foul should be called. Who should get the foul?

Player control foul.

If you ask yourself, "Who caused the contact?" The answer is easy.

If A1 has their foot out in front, and then puts their weight on their back foot. B1 then comes up and, the way I picture it, almost straddles A1's front leg, without causing contact. Since A1 had that front leg there first, are they entitled to the space above it because of verticality? Or does that not apply, since you could also say B1 is entitled to that space since they got there without fouling.

Also, but unrelated, how do I quote an earlier post? I haven't been able to figure that out yet.

Thank You.

You click on the quote icon under the post.

Verticality applies to a NORMAL body position above the body, being in the position described verticality has no bearing.

Would it be fair to say that verticality applies to the plane above your hips?

This topic comes up every now & then and you guys are over-thinking it, just as happens each time it's discussed. Who has the air rights above A1's leg really has nothing to do with how this play is called. Having said that B1 is perfectly entitled to straddle A1's leg in this play, as long as he does not push into A1 as he does so.

In this play I don't see how A1 can significantly displace B1 simply by trying to maintain his balance or shifting his weight back to his pivot foot. If B1 *is* displaced A1 more than likely PUSHED him, and pushed him hard - foul on A1. If A1 attempts to regain his balance and *incidentally* contacts B1 without displacing B1 from his position then we have nothing.

When I think of the principle of verticality I envision a situation where A1 is an airborn shooter and B1 jumps straight up to block the shot. There is contact for a foul to be called. If B1 is straight up, i.e., not leaning over to block the shot, even though there is contact, it is a PC foul. Otherwise, a block. Is this of which you are referring, Dan.

Foul by B1.

How is that a foul on B1, where does it say B can't straddle A1's leg? The rules do talk about a normal body position and what is described is not a normal position for A1. B1 has LGP, so all you could have is PC or nothing.

If B1 is not put at a disadvantage, there is no foul. If A1 causes contact over B1's vertical plane that cause the shot to be way off, no foul (in general). This contact could be relatively severe, IMO, without a foul.

If you microdot the rulebook on this one I think it is a mistake.
NBA - No call.. play on.
COLLEGE - Probably the same... unless someone gets knocked down pretty hard, or if an arm is extended.
HIGH SCHOOL - Look at the whole play to the finish.. see who was more overly aggressive and use your common sense on who was put at a disadvantage and give them the benefit of the doubt.
Probably the more you've seen this play... the more you'll have a chance to make a good judgement on it... and get it right.
My opinion.

Two points of judgment here. First, is B1 vertical? If so, does A1 put B1 at a disadvantage by virtue of the contact?

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.

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.