A closely guarded clarification

[blindzebra]

I e-mailed Gary Whelchel AIA State Commissioner of Officials, rules interpreter for the state of Arizona, and he served on the NF rules committee.

Here is what Mr. Whelchel had to say:


The key phrase is "maintain legal guarding position" - emphasis on maintain. Defensive players with their back to the offensive player are NOT in legal guarding position.

The rule of thumb and by interpretation is that if the offensive player gets beyond the defensive player, then the count is ended - and the usual criteria is based upon "shoulders past the defense".

This does apply to all directions, and if B is not in legal guarding position (by turning away) then the count ends.


I hope this helps. Perhaps he will pass it on to the NF.

[rainmaker]

Originally posted by blindzebra
I e-mailed Gary Whelchel AIA State Commissioner of Officials, rules interpreter for the state of Arizona, and he served on the NF rules committee.

Here is what Mr. Whelchel had to say:


The key phrase is "maintain legal guarding position" - emphasis on maintain. Defensive players with their back to the offensive player are NOT in legal guarding position.

The rule of thumb and by interpretation is that if the offensive player gets beyond the defensive player, then the count is ended - and the usual criteria is based upon "shoulders past the defense".

This does apply to all directions, and if B is not in legal guarding position (by turning away) then the count ends.


I hope this helps. Perhaps he will pass it on to the NF.

Did he say anything about when A1 turns her back on the defender?

[ShoeBall]

Originally posted by rainmaker

Did he say anything about when A1 turns her back on the defender?

That's not a very good question, but i think your were being recalcitrant.


A better question is:

What if B1 is turned "sideways" to A1 and either with B1's face turned or not turned to A1?

How much "sideways" can B1 be?

[blindzebra]

Originally posted by rainmaker

Did he say anything about when A1 turns her back on the defender?

I posted his entire reply. I take the shoulder past B1 to mean that is the way to lose LGP by A1's actions. All other count ending criteria was by B1's doing.

I wrote him back thanking him and asked if he'd pass our issues along to the NF.

[ShoeBall]

So I guess we can some up "closely guarding" as being:

B1 is mostly facing A1 and within a 6 foot radius of A1 and is not on the side of either of the imaginary lines (through A1's shoulders and at 90 degrees to the sidelines or baselines) which is the opposite side to what can be described as the side to which A1 is mostly facing.


How's that?

[EDIT]:


Hmmm...that doesn't seem to cover when A1 is running directly away from B1...for instance with back turned...so I guess Rainmaker I was wrong calling your question bad...sorry...

How about with this extra condition:

B1 is mostly facing A1 and within a 6 foot radius of A1 and is not on the side of either of the imaginary lines (through A1's shoulders and at 90 degrees to the sidelines or baselines) which is the opposite side to what can be described as the side to which A1 is mostly facing, unless A1 is dribbling away from B1 where "dribbling away from" is described as dribbling in a direction eminating from B1 ....blah blah blah....wow..this got too tough for me



[Edited by ShoeBall on Jun 23rd, 2004 at 03:00 AM]

[blindzebra]

Actually, if we are using LGP as our guide. That needs to be established:

Both feet touching the floor in bounds facing A1. Add within six feet and the count ends or restarts when:

1. A1 gets head and shoulder past B1, in whatever direction A1 is going and B1 is guarding. Usually this is toward the basket.

2. B1 is no longer within six feet.

3. A1 starts or ends a dribble. This resets the count.

I'd say that means A1's direction has no bearing on your count, as long as B1 has obtained LGP and moves with A1 to maintain the 6 feet.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by ShoeBall

That's not a very good question, but i think your were being recalcitrant.

Yeah, she's certainly been a repeat offender at being calcitrant. As a matter of fact, she's noted for it. We're sending her to therapy for the problem. We're also trying to arrange a scholarship to Question School for her too.

[Edited by Jurassic Referee on Jun 23rd, 2004 at 06:45 AM]

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by blindzebra


The key phrase is "maintain legal guarding position" - emphasis on maintain. Defensive players with their back to the offensive player are NOT in legal guarding position.

The rule of thumb and by interpretation is that if the offensive player gets beyond the defensive player, then the count is ended - and the usual criteria is based upon "shoulders past the defense".

This does apply to all directions, and if B is not in legal guarding position (by turning away) then the count ends.

Iow, the defender has to first establish a LGP by getting in the path of the player with the ball, face him and get both feet set. Then when the defender now closes up within 6 feet, we start the count. Maintain the count until the player with the ball either stops or starts dribbling. As long as the defender stays facing the dribbler and continuously within 6 feet of him, no matter what direction the dribbler goes or faces, the count continues- unless the dribbler happens to "beat" the defender.

That sum it up, BZ?

Feel free to continue fighting with Dan though. I bought extra popcorn last night, and I'd hate to see it go to waste.

[rainmaker]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

Yeah, she's certainly been a repeat offender at being calcitrant. As a matter of fact, she's noted for it. We're sending her to therapy for the problem. We're also trying to arrange a scholarship to Question School for her too.

[Edited by Jurassic Referee on Jun 23rd, 2004 at 06:45 AM]

It WOULD be great to get a scholarship. The level of ball I work would never pay the tuition. But my husband is very, very tired of the questions. Not to mention my brothers. Maybe you should find me a scholarship to WTH school instead.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by rainmaker
[/B]

Maybe you should find me a scholarship to WTH school instead. [/B][/QUOTE]How about WTF school? Dan is the principal.

[Snake~eyes]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

Maybe you should find me a scholarship to WTH school instead. [/B]

How about WTF school? Dan is the principal. [/B][/QUOTE]
I understand they tried to recruit MTDjr but he turned them down for some odd unknown reason.

[TravelinMan]

Originally posted by ShoeBall

That's not a very good question, but i think your were being recalcitrant.

Hmmm...... Don't think Juulie is being recalcitrant, but I do think Dan and she have some of those recalcitrants at home.

[mick]

Originally posted by TravelinMan

Hmmm...... Don't think Juulie is being recalcitrant, but I do think Dan and she have some of those recalcitrants at home.

Not Dan.
He's got a sawzall at home.
mick

[TravelinMan]

Originally posted by mick

Not Dan.
He's got a sawzall at home.
mick

Mick
That's probably why he doesn't have any recalcitrants anymore. Spare the rod, spoil the child!

[Dan_ref]

Recalcitrant principals armed with sawzalls...and Juulie, what's this something we got at home??? When did WE get a home to have something in???


Sigh...wtf.

[Edited by Dan_ref on Jun 24th, 2004 at 01:21 AM]