Closely Guarded

[rainmaker]

Originally posted by blindzebra
And 4-10 requires guarding, guarding is defined in 4-23 and no where in 4-23 does it say LGP is lost if A1 turns away.

What Dan is saying is that LGP is necessary, which you are agreeing with. He's also saying it's not sufficient. Just having LGP and being within 6 feet isn't enough. THere's more to closely guarding. I'm not saying I agree with him, just that what you're saying doesn't refute what he's saying.

Originally posted by blindzebra
By your interp, A1 can pivot for 8 full minutes and never reach a 5 second count. All they have to do is turn away from B1. Can't you see how stupid that sounds?

Dan's talking about dribbling, not holding, the ball. The situations are very different, indeed.

[blindzebra]

Originally posted by rainmaker

What Dan is saying is that LGP is necessary, which you are agreeing with. He's also saying it's not sufficient. Just having LGP and being within 6 feet isn't enough. THere's more to closely guarding. I'm not saying I agree with him, just that what you're saying doesn't refute what he's saying.

Dan's talking about dribbling, not holding, the ball. The situations are very different, indeed.

How are they different? If I am holding the ball and have not dribbled what is my path? If a dribble is required to establish a path, you can never obtain LGP on an offensive player holding the ball, now can you?

Dan is saying the count is off ANYTIME A1 turns away from B1 and B1 is no longer in the path of the direction A1 is facing. That is ridiculous.

Ask yourself this question.

What is the purpose of the closely guarded count?

Possible answers:

1. To reward good defense.

2. To keep the game from becoming actionless.

3. To penalize showboating, by limiting a Curly Neal/And One dribbling display.

How is it rewarding good defense when Dan is requiring B1 to defend the division line if A1 turns away from the basket? It's not. It is illogical and is contradictory to the intent of the rule.

It also allows both 2 and 3 because A1 can end the count any time they face away from B1.

I agree that there is not an exact case play in the rules that clearly supports either of our positions, but at least mind is based on logic and in the spirit of the closely guarded rule.

[blindzebra]

Originally posted by Dan_ref

Well. For being one of the few people on the planet who understand how to correctly use "beg the question" I will buy you the beverage of your choice down at the Wagon Wheel (or whatever that place is down the hill). Luckily diet coke is cheap.

Now, to anwser your question...sort of.

What I call or do not call is not relevant. Fact is the rule book states in the path. And it's not qualified by a case play. Fed or NCAA.

Not easy for me to see how "path", without a special definition within the rules, conforms to your liberal interpretation. Kinda depends on what the definition of is is.

BTW, if A1 turns his back to B1 & dribbles away from the basket no way in hell I'm going to call 5 seconds.

How about this one.

A1 is dribbling up the sideline. B1 has established LGP and is giving ground directly in front of A1. A1 crosses the division line and B1 is within 6 feet, a count begins, correct?

A1 then changes direction and moves toward the center of the court and the top of the key. B1 slides diagonally with A1 maintaining LGP and is within 6 feet, but is no longer directly in front of A1, but is moving on a parallel path. Do you keep your count?

[rainmaker]

Originally posted by blindzebra
A1 is dribbling up the sideline. B1 has established LGP and is giving ground directly in front of A1. A1 crosses the division line and B1 is within 6 feet, a count begins, correct?

A1 then changes direction and moves toward the center of the court and the top of the key. B1 slides diagonally with A1 maintaining LGP and is within 6 feet, but is no longer directly in front of A1, but is moving on a parallel path. Do you keep your count?

BZ -- First of all, the definition of LGP doesn't include being "in the path" so it IS possible to establish LGP on someone who is holding the ball, and not dribbling. All that is required for LGP is to be to have initially had both feet on the floor and be facing the opponent. So here, we discover another problem with the way the book is written. The definition of guarding says, "in the path", but that doesn't seem to be required by LGP, or for closely guarded. And being "in the path" is definitely not defined at all.

Secondly, in the play given above, I would maintain the count when the paths are parallel instead of identical.

Originally posted by blindzebra
What is the purpose of the closely guarded count?

Possible answers:

1. To reward good defense.

2. To keep the game from becoming actionless.

3. To penalize showboating, by limiting a Curly Neal/And One dribbling display.

How is it rewarding good defense when Dan is requiring B1 to defend the division line if A1 turns away from the basket? It's not. It is illogical and is contradictory to the intent of the rule.

It also allows both 2 and 3 because A1 can end the count any time they face away from B1.

I would think if A1 was trying to get away with this, that good defense would include a double team that would effectively cut off any path at all for the ball. Then the count would continue.

[rainmaker]

Originally posted by blindzebra
I agree that there is not an exact case play in the rules that clearly supports either of our positions, but at least mind is based on logic and in the spirit of the closely guarded rule.

BZ -- You think that your interp is based on logic, but anyone who doesn't accept your assumptions, as Dan doesn't, isn't going to agree with your conclusions and at that point, neither of you can use logic as an arguement. Logic is based on assumptions, and those aren't held in common, logic simply disintegrates.

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by blindzebra

Dan is saying the count is off ANYTIME A1 turns away from B1 and B1 is no longer in the path of the direction A1 is facing. That is ridiculous.

No, Dan is NOT saying that.

What I'm saying is if A1 turns & dribbles away from his defender he is not being closely guarded under the rules as written, becase the defender is no longer in his path.

As I said to Mick earlier, if A1 is holding the ball he has no established path. If he creates one it's a travel. Different sitch, different application of the rules.

[Kelvin green]

I think we are blowing this closely guarded thing way out of proportion. Particularly overanayzing this "path" thing.


Lets add some new cases or editorial comments/point of emphasis to the case book

If a person is not legally guarding then they are illegally guarding. If you are illegally guarding (not facing and not directly between A1 and the basket) then the foul is Always on the defense if contact occurs. (Point of Emphasis)

Player B1 standing on court with back to player near intersection of FT line and FT lane line (elbow) A1 is driving toward basket but likes the elbow for the 15' jump shot. A1 takes two steps to his right bumps displaces B1 and shoot and scores. Ruling: Score the basket and give A1 a shot since B1 was not in legal guarding position and not in the path of A1.

A1 stops near top of key. B1 is on the mid court side facing the player with in 6 ft looking for a place to pass ball. A1 is being harassesd by B1 from behind... now side and cant pass the ball. but B1 never gets between A1 and Basket. Ruling: no 5 second call B1 could not make eye contact with A1 and therefore could not be facing A1, and since was on misdcourt side was not in path. The fact that A! could not pass the ball is is of no consequence in this play.

A1 is being double teamed. A1 has ended dribble. A1 is not being double teamed but triple teamed out on a 45 degree facing his bench) angle from basket and has a clear "path" (dont confuse with NBA here) B1 is on one side (facing him), B2 is on the other side, and B3 is at the rear cutting of the pass to the other guard out there trying to get ball. Ruling: No 5 second count continue to play.

Same play A1 pivots and faces basket yet all three stay where they are at and continue harassing him defenders arms in "path" yet A1 can't pass. Ruling No 5 second count because neither defender is in the path

Same play as above A1 pivots now faces the basket and both defenders are not in his path to basket but harassing that A1 cannot pass or shoot. A1 pivots again now displacing B2. B2 was not in legal guarding position and not in path. Ruling: Foul by B2 since B2 was illegally guarding B1.

As A1 drives from left side of lane to right side of lane A1 is facing bench and moving directly along the FT line to get a better shot. A2 slides to FT line to screen B2 who is in the path of A1 since B2 is between A1 and basket. better shot. B2 contacts A2. Ruling: Foul on B2. He was not in legal guarding position on A2 and was not between A2 and the basket, or in the "path".

A1 secures a rebound near first lane space. A1 decides she needs to dribble to start an new play. A1 is running directly towards midcourt. B1 is at FT line attempting to stop A1 from passing to A2 near mid court line. A1 runs into B1 and then passes to A2. Ruling: Foul on B1. Although B1 was facing A1 there cannot be a foul since B1 was illegally guarding A1. In this play the "path" requirement of not being between the basket and the offender was not met creating the foul on B1.

Player A1 is standing near top of key surrounded by four other offensive players and no defense cannot get to dribbler, Defense is six feet from screenerbut away from the basket. Ruling: Since Defense is not between the dribbler and basket there cannot be a five second count.


Face it we can nitpick semantics all day long and it aint going to work.

[Dan_ref]

Kelvin, the problem is both the fed & NCAA use the term "path" in their definition of what constitutes closely guarded or guarding. The definition of "path" is critical to the rule. Compare that to how the travel and over&back rules, for instance, are written. No doubt as to what the intent of those rule are.

[Kelvin green]

Dan

No doubt that path is critical that's my point exactly..

Path is there but if we interpret it to mean ONLY between player and basket we have missed the boat!

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by Kelvin green
Dan

No doubt that path is critical that's my point exactly..

Path is there but if we interpret it to mean ONLY between player and basket we have missed the boat!

I think we agree.

[Camron Rust]

My take....

A1 is closely guarded when B1 is within 6ft and is influencing the path and action of A1.

Once A1 is sufficiently past B1 so as to not need to go around B1 to reach their desired spot there is no count.

[blindzebra]

Originally posted by rainmaker

BZ -- First of all, the definition of LGP doesn't include being "in the path" so it IS possible to establish LGP on someone who is holding the ball, and not dribbling. All that is required for LGP is to be to have initially had both feet on the floor and be facing the opponent. So here, we discover another problem with the way the book is written. The definition of guarding says, "in the path", but that doesn't seem to be required by LGP, or for closely guarded. And being "in the path" is definitely not defined at all.

Secondly, in the play given above, I would maintain the count when the paths are parallel instead of identical.

I would think if A1 was trying to get away with this, that good defense would include a double team that would effectively cut off any path at all for the ball. Then the count would continue.

None of the individual rules say what does or does not need to be done or maintained EXACTLY.

4-10 says 6 feet and guarded while HOLDING or dribbling.

4-23-ART 1 says guarding is legally placing yourself in the path. Both say guarding, correct? 4-23-Art 1 does not say ANYTHING about the offensive player dribbling.

4-23-ART 2 and 3 talk about LGP and how to establish it and maintain it. ART 2 and 3 don't say a word about path or a difference between holding or dribbling, or that B1 loses LGP if A1 TURNS AWAY.

10-6 ART 2 mentions contact on a dribbler and talks about path. It supplies our head and shoulder ruling and talks about B1 riding A1 off their path or establishing in the path forcing A1 to turn to avoid contact.

What does that leave us? A mess.

If all we do is take 4-10 and 4-23-ART 1 as written, then A1 can NEVER commit a 5 second violation unless B1 is directly in front of whatever direction A1 is moving or FACING. I seriously doubt that is how they want us to interpret closely guarded.

[blindzebra]

Originally posted by Dan_ref

No, Dan is NOT saying that.

What I'm saying is if A1 turns & dribbles away from his defender he is not being closely guarded under the rules as written, becase the defender is no longer in his path.

As I said to Mick earlier, if A1 is holding the ball he has no established path. If he creates one it's a travel. Different sitch, different application of the rules.

How about the other play I brought up?

A1 dribbles up the side with B1, with LGP and directly in their path, giving ground. A1 crosses the division line, a 5 second count begins. You'd have this count, right?

A1 then changes direction and moves toward the middle of the court at the top of the key. B1 slides with A1 on a parallel diagonal path and is within 6 feet. Are you continuing your count?

This is important because technically B1 is not in A1's path, unless path is also concidered between A1 and their basket, or path has no bearing on closely guarded.

[blindzebra]

Originally posted by Camron Rust
My take....

A1 is closely guarded when B1 is within 6ft and is influencing the path and action of A1.

Once A1 is sufficiently past B1 so as to not need to go around B1 to reach their desired spot there is no count.

I'd agree with that, because you are using LGP and not direction of A1 as your guide. I think that is the way that the rule makers intended for us to judge it.

To bad they can't write it that way.

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by blindzebra


How about the other play I brought up?

A1 dribbles up the side with B1, with LGP and directly in their path, giving ground. A1 crosses the division line, a 5 second count begins. You'd have this count, right?

A1 then changes direction and moves toward the middle of the court at the top of the key. B1 slides with A1 on a parallel diagonal path and is within 6 feet. Are you continuing your count?

This is important because technically B1 is not in A1's path, unless path is also concidered between A1 and their basket, or path has no bearing on closely guarded.

You have obviously not been paying attention. Let's try one more time:

1. the word PATH is critical to the rule, both fed & ncaa

2. PATH is not defined in the rules

3. So we cannot assume it is used as a term of art

4. Which you obviously do by continually throwing out "yeah but whatabout" plays as opposed to providing solid rule backup for your position.

5. None of which have any bearing on how the rule is worded.

I can't think of any more direct way of saying this to you. If you find it insulting...well...you'll probably get over it eventually. This has been beaten to death more than any living or nonliving thing deserves to be.