Screening Posture

[rainmaker]

I would think there'd be a difference depending on which way the "screener" is facing. If he's toward the defender head-on, that's one thing. Sideways to incoming player would be entirely different. On the other hand, if he's just standing there picking his nose, so to speak, I'd have a hard time calling him for any contact which may occur.

Still, I think the defenders are being a little flimsy if they say they can't get around him because he's taking up too much room. Sheez no player is THAT wide!

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by rainmaker
I would think there'd be a difference depending on which way the "screener" is facing. If he's toward the defender head-on, that's one thing. Sideways to incoming player would be entirely different. On the other hand, if he's just standing there picking his nose, so to speak, I'd have a hard time calling him for any contact which may occur.

By rule, which way the screener is facing can't be a factor. R4-39-2 says that the screener can legally face any direction. To have a legal screen though, any contact should be on the screener's torso- not on a screener's extended appendages, which includes arms, legs, butts, heads, etc.

[mick]

Originally posted by DownTownTonyBrown
How about an opponent running by in front of the screen and incidentally taking his head off?

I'm thinking no call on my part, and the guy/screener will likely staighten up for the rest of the game.

We don't allow that kind of stance in the post play; why should we allow it here?

Again, no foul until there is contact... then likely, "Illegal Screen."

Incidental contact can work for me, DownTownTonyBrown, but not the automatic foul on the over-bender.
Then, if we must explain the principles of screening, we certainly may.
mick

[rainmaker]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

By rule, which way the screener is facing can't be a factor. R4-39-2 says that the screener can legally face any direction. To have a legal screen though, any contact should be on the screener's torso- not on a screener's extended appendages, which includes arms, legs, butts, heads, etc.

I understand the principle you're working from. But the way I'm picturing the kid with his hands on his knees, I"m not seeing a lot of "extension." Contact could very likely be on torso. I also think the defenders are being whiners to complain that they can't get around.

[Mark Dexter]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

By rule, which way the screener is facing can't be a factor. R4-39-2 says that the screener can legally face any direction. To have a legal screen though, any contact should be on the screener's torso- not on a screener's extended appendages, which includes arms, legs, butts, heads, etc.

If we want to go by the technical definition of just the torso, then wouldn't contact in the back be a foul by the screener?

Sometimes a crouch is a legitimate defensive posture - especially if the defender is attacking the ball. Unless the defender is purposely sticking his/her rear out into traffic, I'm going to have a hard time calling that defender for a foul on the contact.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by Mark Dexter
[/B]

Sometimes a crouch is a legitimate defensive posture - especially if the defender is attacking the ball. Unless the defender is purposely sticking his/her rear out into traffic, I'm going to have a hard time calling that defender for a foul on the contact.
[/B][/QUOTE]Exactly. Judgement call. If you think that the defender is purposely sticking his butt out into traffic by assuming an unnatural stance to enhance the size of the screen, then he's gaining an unfair advantage- and a foul should be called on the screener IF any subsequent contact is on the body part that is deliberately sticking out where it normally wouldn't be. If the contact is on where the screener's torso would be in a normal stance, then the onus for contact should shift to the defensive player being screened.

[blindzebra]

Originally posted by Mark Dexter

If we want to go by the technical definition of just the torso, then wouldn't contact in the back be a foul by the screener?

Sometimes a crouch is a legitimate defensive posture - especially if the defender is attacking the ball. Unless the defender is purposely sticking his/her rear out into traffic, I'm going to have a hard time calling that defender for a foul on the contact.

The torso is the trunk of the body. That is the neck to the waist front and back.

[Mark Dexter]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

Sometimes a crouch is a legitimate defensive posture - especially if the defender is attacking the ball. Unless the defender is purposely sticking his/her rear out into traffic, I'm going to have a hard time calling that defender for a foul on the contact.
[/B]

Exactly. Judgement call. If you think that the defender is purposely sticking his butt out into traffic by assuming an unnatural stance to enhance the size of the screen, then he's gaining an unfair advantage- and a foul should be called on the screener IF any subsequent contact is on the body part that is deliberately sticking out where it normally wouldn't be. If the contact is on where the screener's torso would be in a normal stance, then the onus for contact should shift to the defensive player being screened. [/B][/QUOTE]

Guess we agree, then.

[Mark Dexter]

Originally posted by blindzebra

The torso is the trunk of the body. That is the neck to the waist front and back.

I've always considered the torso to be limited to the front of the body. To each his own.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by Mark Dexter

I've always considered the torso to be limited to the front of the body. To each his own.
[/B]

From Dictionary.com-- torso- trunk; a human body excluding the head and limbs". Sounds like neck to hips and butt with no arms,legs or head- and facing in no particular direction.

[DownTownTonyBrown]

Where do you get an offcial reference like that?

And is it admissible?

[barknoll]

..........if they offensive player, instead of putting his hands on his knees-------goes into a post up position with his hand out and calling for the ball at the top of the key...........that would be "normal bb position", albeit not in a normal spot on the court (usually on the blocks), but would have same effect .........and deemed legal....

......as long as he does not "hold off" or otherwise extend the Non-ball hand.....

[jritchie]

if the screener is just bent over and the defense keeps complaining about having to go around him, but still hasn't made contact with him...you have nothing!!!! but good officiating would let him(screener) know that if contact is made, it will be a foul on him!!! so in other words tell him to stand up or tell the defense to run his butt over!!