Closely Guarded

blindzebra · #1 (**permalink**) Sun Jun 20, 2004, 10:53pm

Quote:

Originally posted by Dan_ref

Quote:

Originally posted by blindzebra

Quote:

Originally posted by Dan_ref

Quote:

Originally posted by blindzebra

Quote:

Originally posted by Dan_ref

Quote:

Originally posted by blindzebra

Quote:

Originally posted by Dan_ref

Quote:

Originally posted by blindzebra

You are not guarding if the dribbler is passed you.

Like Camron said, depends on what direction the dribbler is going.

I explained it in an earlier post. The path is TOWARD the basket. A defender that is behind a dribbler moving AWAY from the basket is still in the path to the basket.

Once the ball is in the front court the offense's objective is to score, so a defender is guarding if they are in the path between their opponent and the basket.

Chuck, what I objected to was this post by BZ, where he claims "in the path" is irrelevant compared to being between the dribbler & the basket, specifically when the dribbler is moving AWAY from the basket. I asked him for a rule or case play to back this up. He couldn't. Neither, apparently could you.

That's all.

Nice job of avoiding. I explained it, just the way I BET you'd call it in a game. Go back and read the post that has 4-23-ART 2 and 3 mentioned. If you still can't understand after that, then you are denser than a rock.

THAT'S ALL!

First of all 4-23-2&3 relates to obtaining and maintaing guarding position, not the requirements for a defender to be in a closely guarding position. Try 4-10 and get back to me.

Secondly, why don't you try and be man enough to engage in polite debate without hurling insults. I'm not your big brother or your mom and you wouldn't even know me if I was peeing on your leg so there's no need to come off with that angry teenager sh1t, OK?

You are the one with the condescending,WTF and shrug stuff, remember? You started this , so don't even try to pull the I'm taking the high road stuff.

If you actually read what was said, 4-23 was in reference to parts of the rule book that are unclear HOW the NF want us to call something. When they changed the how to establish LGP rule 4-23 ART 2 to include playing court, not something simple like IN BOUNDS, they failed to spell out that inbound statis needed to be maintained. The rule AS WRITTEN says B1 can move OOB after establishing LGP. The NF had to issue an update to the change. That is what I was talking about, parts of our poorly written rulebook are ambiguous, and PATH is one of those parts.

There are only two ways to view path in closely guarded that make any sense:

1. It has no baring at all.

2. Path is between the player with the ball and the basket.

It is stupid to require a defender to re-establish path on an offensive player heading for a boundary. Do we expect B1 to try to stop A1 from GOING OOB? GOING OVER AND BACK?

There is nothing in the rulebook that says LGP is lost if the offensive player turns away. Path is required to ESTABLISH LGP, but is only lost if the player GETS PAST the defender. 9.10.1 SIT C says, " As soon as B1 has assummed a guarding position, both feet on the floor, facing the opponent, no other specific requirement is in effect. The amount of movement or THE ACTUAL BODY POSITION of the player is irrelevant. Not really clear, like a lot of what we have to go by, but it will do from my end.

2 things junior:

- LGP necessary but not sufficient for a defender to be considered closely guarding. 4-10.

- It's bearing, not baring.

The sign of a lost arguement; needing to focus on a typo.

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.

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?