#59 In setting a stationary screen,team A has four players get down on all fours as in a football stance. Official rules this is not a legal position in setting a screen, Is the official correct?

(does anybody else have the "IAABO Refresher Exam-2005?)

You're kidding, right?

Nobody really, actually put a question like that on an actual basketball rules examination?

Please tell me you're kidding, Larry.

...that question is word-for-word from the IAABO REFRESHER EXAM-2005 (Prepared by IAABO Rules Examination Committee)

Actually, that doesn't really surprise me. :D

If that isn't the most moronic question ever put on an exam, it has to be in the top 5 anyway. For the life of me, I can't see any value at all in posing a question like that. It's a play that you just aren't gonna ever see or have to rule on.

Yoohoo, Chuck? 'Sup with this?

Don't look at me. I'm not on the Exam Committee.

Well......is that any reason <b>not</b> to answer the question?

Is that a legal position to set a screen? Gotta have a rules citation with your answer, of course.

Would it be a legal position if the four teammates laid down on their backs with their arms and legs in the air and barked? Or is that the next question on the exam?

C'mon, Chuck. You gotta write this exam, don't you? Why won't you come out and play? :D

PS- I <b>think</b> I know the correct answer.






[Edited by Jurassic Referee on Oct 15th, 2005 at 12:24 PM]

Very possibly the stupidest question ever from any officiating exam.

I can't think of anything more moronic. The "barking like a dog" question might tie...

I am glad that everyone who has replied is so smug and so arrogant and so sure of their rules knowledge that they feel no need to actually answer the question. Refresher exams often pose seemingly silly or unlikely-in-real-life scenarios. Yet, there isn't a season that goes by where I do not encounter some wierd, strange or obscure play that involves a complete knowledge of the rules as well as the confidence to tell the coach that despite "never having seen that call in 20 years," it is indeed correct by rule..

But then I do not have the luxury of picking all my assignments, so I don't always have AAAA state champion games played above the rim, by well-coached teams with great body control and outstanding basketball skills. Sometimes, it's a 5th grade girls travel game where ponytails may actually touch out of bounds while they are holding the ball inbounds.

As for the specific question, I cannot find anything that makes this "screen" illegal. Assuming all the other rules for a legal screen are met (no contact, distance, time, stationary and, in the frontcourt, not controling the ball for 5 seconds behind the screening teammates), I have nothing.

Of course, to reach this opinion, I had to look up a number of rules and definitions -- which presumably is the point of the review question.

I guess you didn't look up R10-6-1, eh? I think I can make an argument outa part of the language in that particular cite to state that this type of screen really is illegal.

I also agree that IAABO refresher exams post silly and unlikely rules scenarios. They should, however, post questions that do have a definitive rules answer.

This question is stoopid. It does <b>NOT</b> have a definitive answer. It doesn't really test anyone's rules knowledge. It's a waste of time. Anybody that thinks differently is smug and arrogant.

I completely agree with you. Some of us lose sight of the fact that we have been around for a long time and we think everyone understands of the rules like we do. I agree this might not be the most "common sense" type of question, but someone probably tried this somewhere.

On the other hand I would say this is illegal based on the fact it violates some of the basic principles of verticality and what is considered to be a legal screen by all the definitions. Also the spirit of the rule is to have a screen upright. I have never seen a screen like this attempted, but if attempted I would not consider it legal.

JMO

Peace

I agree the question is stupid to veterans like you, but it is not stupid to a first year official. I have always said these test do not prove rules knowledge. The NF asks a lot of questions that do not test rules knowledge at all. The NF will ask questions that test if you know the exact wording of the rules, and that in my opinion is not testing rules knowledge or application. Of course it is nice to know how big a line is on the court, but I am not stopping any games if the lines are not perfect.

Peace

That was my original thought. But as I read the defintion of screen (4-39), the corresponding rule for fouls (10-6-3) and the rule for closely guarded (9-10-1b), I could not find a sepcific rules reference to back up what I thought was correct. It sure seems wrong. But I could not find a rule that forbids it.

Rule 10-6-1 -"A player shall not.....impede the progress of an opponent....by bending the body into other than a normal position".

Is being down on all fours considered a "normal position" to play the game of basketball?

Again, this question is completely stoopid. There is <b>NO</b> definitive answer to it. Just opinions. It might make for an interesting discussion on a forum like this, but it has no place on a rules exam.

So just because I think it's a stupid question, that makes me smug and arrogant? There are questions on the NFHS exam that many people think are stupid as well. I guess that makes them smug and arrogant as well.

I'm not interested in answering the question. If you want to, go ahead. But don't criticize me just because I think the question is stupid. I'm entitled to that opinion.

It's also stoopid question because it's not likely to happen. Even if there is a rules reference for this, it's not something anyone needs to know.

You never know when a real life situation will come up though.

<u><b>IAABO QUESTION #51</b></u>
Dribbler A1 jumps off 2 teammates, A2 and A3, who are down on all fours on the floor, and then A1 dunks the ball. The official (from Ohio) called four technical fouls- one on each of the players on the floor for lifting a teammate, one on the dribbler for climbing on a teammate and another one on the dribbler for dunking a dead ball. Was this official correct?

The relevant rules citations are R10-3-7(e) and R10-3-4.

Couldn't help myself. :D

Yea, I guess. I just think that the time it takes to construct a test, and the time spent by the test-takers in studying and then "writing" the test is better spent on situations that are more likely to occur. It just seems incredibly foolhardy to expect people to bone up on these kinds of things when there are real issues that need addressing, such as the ins and outs of the backcourt violation, and the ups and downs of travelling.

my two cents

Before I call the illegal screen, I am whacking them with a Unsportsmalike T for turning the game into a travesty.

If I heard the coach tell them, Id whack him, thenhe'd complain and I'd run him.

If we are taking a poll, my vote is that this is a stuped question

"Anybody that thinks differently is smug and arrogant."
 

"Anybody that thinks differently is smug and arrogant."

I love it when you kid around.

JR's point about being bent into an unnatural position is a good one. I was sort of on the fence b/c of the sitch where a defender falls down and the dribbler trips over him. But in that case, I guess you could say that just lying there isn't unnatural and that's why he isn't penalized.

I've said this before, but the penalty for making a travesty of the game is not a T. It's a forfeit.