Can anyone find any information concerning a prescribed "posture" when screening? Situation : Player (fairly large) goes into his frontcourt, sets up at the top of the key and bends over placing his hands on his knees. He keeps this posture until his teammates cross halfcourt. They use him as a screen as he maintains this posture and does not move at all to initiate any type of contact. The defense cries that he is impossible to get around in that "stance" and it should not be allowed. I have found no info in my rule-book as to the legality of his posture in setting this screen.

Read NFHS rule 10-6-1, especially the part that says "a player shall not.... impede the progress of an opponent...by bending the body into any other than a normal position". In this case, if you feel that the screener is gaining an extra advantage by bending over and taking up more space than his normal screening stance would take, then call him on it if contact occurs. There's not really that much difference in the screener extending his butt backwards and his head/shoulders forwards instead of him extending an arm or leg sideways, is there? Contact outside the torso should still be called on the screener.

Player was standing funny?
 

That'd be a tough call for me, JR.
When the posturing player "<I>does not move at all to initiate any type of contact</I>", and if the contact is initiated by an opponent, what happens to a player's right to a place on the floor?
I don't think I can call a foul on a player merely because he has not achieved or maintained a legal guarding position.

[eg, if an opponent is rising from the floor in an awkward position, a player (making contact with that rising opponent) will be called for intiating sufficient contact.]

mick

JR, I take this to mean that the "bend" motion occurs at time that the defender is attempting to pass by, the sitch states that the player was in the position for a considerable amount of time as if he was a fixture....should the timing of the motion be considered?

Re: Player was standing funny?
 

A player doesn't have a right to a spot on the floor simply because a part of his body is over that spot. If he did, then extending elbows, knees, etc would be legal screening tactics. A player is entitled to the space he takes up while in a normal stance. I've always interpreted "normal" to mean "upright" (or nearly so). Otherwise, why couldn't you stand on one foot and stick all your other limbs out to the side? That'd be quite a screen!

Re: Re: Player was standing funny?
 

My 13-year old's normal stance is lying down on the couch. Now that would make a great screen.;)

Are you even in the right thread?
 

:rolleyes: You spent way too much time in New York.Yer talkin' funny.

Bent over. Hands on knees. Not moving.
Legal to thump him?
No.
Foul on the thumper.
mick

Re: Are you even in the right thread?
 

Never legal to take an intentional shot at somebody. Apples and oranges.

But if that guy is bent over so that his butt is extended out of his vertical plane, and a defender is bumped off his coverage by said butt, isn't that a foul on the screener?

If you say no, then what would be illegal about my "standing on one foot" example?

Re: Re: Are you even in the right thread?
 

Chuck,
I did not say your ballerina was illegal.
How much time did you actually spend in NYC? :)

You say the defender was bumped.
Nay, not so. In the given sitch, the bent over player did not move and has a right to be there, not moving.
mick

Re: Re: Player was standing funny?
 

Agree with Chuck. You certainly have the right to stand on the court- in a basketball way. Getting down into a 2-point football stance sure isn't a "normal position", as the rule states, on the basketball court. Would you let a player set a screen by getting down into a 3 or 4-point football stance too? And call a foul on the defender if he ran into the screener's stationary back leg? Would you let a player screen by laying on the court?

Imo, the screener is getting an unfair advantage in this play by extending his butt and head/shoulders into a space that is normally not taken up by the screener setting any type of a normal basketball screen. Iow, if contact occurs, it may be because he's illegally impeded the progress of his opponent by bending his body into other than a normal postion- just like R10-1-6 says. I think that that's the purpose and intent of that rule.

Re: Re: Re: Are you even in the right thread?
 

You say the defender was bumped.
Nay, not so. In the given sitch, the bent over player did not move and has a right to be there, not moving.

[/B][/QUOTE]Agree. There's no rule that says that the player can't stand like that. There's never a foul without contact wither. If contact does occur however, I agree with Chuck that the onus should be on the screener if that contact is on the extended butt. That's basically no different than contact with the extended arm or leg of a screener.

[Edited by Jurassic Referee on Sep 20th, 2004 at 12:27 PM]

Re: Re: Re: Are you even in the right thread?
 

Poor choice of word on my part. True that the screener committed no overt act (i.e., did not move to cause the contact), but the contact caused the defender to move out of his path. And since the contact was on a part of the body that was outside the screener's verical plane, this is a foul on the screener. No? Vocabulary aside, do we really disagree?

Re: Re: Re: Player was standing funny?
 

Ballerinas.
Offensive linemen.
Bent over, hands on knees.
Gymnastics anyone? :)
mick

Was that your head???
 

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."

This looks to be heading toward the "Cone of Verticallity" zone. How about a little preventative officating, tell the big guy to have a better posture and call him on it if he doesn't listen. Make sure there is contact though if you are going to call it.

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!

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.

Re: Was that your head???
 

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

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.

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.

Sometimes a crouch is a legitimate defensive posture - especially if the defender is attacking the ball. Unless the defender is <font color = red>purposely sticking his/her rear out into traffic</font>, 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.

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

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.

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

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

A dictionary!!
 

Where do you get an offcial reference like that?

And is it admissible? :D

add a wrinkle.....
 

..........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.....

sooooooooo!
 

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!!