Bride of the Son of Under (the Sequel)

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally posted by Hawks Coach

The one exception I conceive is B stepping in front of a driving A to take charge without establishing legal guarding position. I believe that the legal guarding position provisions are intended to address a player that moves to take a charge, not a stationary player that is run into by a moving player who is out of control. While this exception requires some subjective judgment, I think everyone knows what it looks like when a player steps in front to draw a foul rather than being stationary.

If you object to this interpretation of the rules, what rule and/or reasoning would you offer in support of an alternative reading?

As I stated earlier, a player in control of the ball must be expected to be guarded the instant he/she gains control of the ball. Time and distance is not a factor if the player in control of the ball is not airborne and if the player is airbone distance is a factor.

1) A1 is dribbling hard toward the basket when B1 steps in front of A1. A1 places both feet on the floor facing B1 an instant before A1 makes contact with B1. Charging by A1. This play can be found in both the NFHS and NCAA casebooks.

2) A1 is dribbling hard toward down the court and goes airborne to either shoot or pass the ball. Prior to A1 going airborne B1 occupies a spot on the court. A1 while airborne makes contact with B1. Charging by A1.

3) Same as (2) but A1 returns to the floor and then makes contact with B1. Charging by A1.

Why? When A1 has the ball, he does not have carte blanche to do anything with his body. When A1 decides to go airborne he must do so in a manner that allows him to return to the floor before making contact with any player who had a legal position on the floor before A1 goes airborne.

We officials have become mesmorized by the leaping ability players that we have forgot to do our job to make sure that the leaping player does not put players who have a legal position on the court at a disadvantage.