Illegal Screens

[riden]

I coach and ref a jr high league, NCAA rules.

First problem, too many coaches are reffing and I think this is the root of the problem.

We have a coach with a very competitive team (girls) who has taught players to screen in this manner:

legs slightly bent, arms locked (hand on elbows and biceps) and out in front of the body for protection but not out past the toes.

Some refs are calling this illegal, citing they are out of thier cylinder. To be clear, players are not leaning forward, they are leaning back, with knees bent. The call is not because they are reaching for players, but that the technique creates an illegal situation.


Any comments on the legitimacy of this argument??

[blindzebra]

They are not allowed to extend their arms, so yes I can see that getting called, because it's a natural reaction to lean into someone that is about to run into you.

Why coaches teach that or the hands at the throat, elbows out is beyond me.

Here's a tip: Feet shoulder width apart, arms slightly in front of the body, straight, with hands clasped covering the groin.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by blindzebra

Here's a tip: Feet shoulder width apart, arms slightly in front of the body, straight, with hands clasped covering the groin.

That's the boys' technique, girls like to protect themselves a little higher.

[blindzebra]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

That's the boys' technique, girls like to protect themselves a little higher.

Then I suggest arms crossed, hands on opposite shoulder, because, every alternative I've seen leads to either the lean in push or the chickenwing chuck.

[riden]

Originally Posted by blindzebra

Then I suggest arms crossed, hands on opposite shoulder, because, every alternative I've seen leads to either the lean in push or the chickenwing chuck.

I see your point BUT

The argument is, even if the technique is perfect it is illegal.

From what I see, these girls have very good technique and are not leaning.

[blindzebra]

Originally Posted by riden

I see your point BUT

The argument is, even if the technique is perfect it is illegal.

From what I see, these girls have very good technique and are not leaning.

They are not allowed to extend their arms, so what is being taught is illegal.

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by riden

I see your point BUT

The argument is, even if the technique is perfect it is illegal.

From what I see, these girls have very good technique and are not leaning.

The way I envision it as long as they don't overtly extend their elbows out beyond their shoulders or use their elbows to chuck the other player this stance is perfectly legal.

[JRutledge]

I agree that a screener cannot use their arms, lean over or move into the screened player. I usually call this based on what the "screenee" does. If the player being screened just gives up position, I will likely pass on any foul. I will liken my philosophy on screens to what my philosophy on holding in football. The violated players need to do something to get a consistent call.

Now some will say, "You cannot have a philosophy like that; it does not fit the rules." Whatever my philosophy is, I tend to call by far many more illegal screens than anyone. I even had an official in a pre-game say, "I have never called a team control foul and do not see myself calling one."

Peace

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I even had an official in a pre-game say, "I have never called a team control foul and do not see myself calling one."

Peace

My goodness.

If he told me that I would have an illegal screen in his area within the first 2 minutes of the game.

geeze.

[IREFU2]

Originally Posted by Dan_ref

My goodness.

If he told me that I would have an illegal screen in his area within the first 2 minutes of the game.

geeze.

He must be on crack!, Not Rut, but the partner that made that statement.

[blindzebra]

Frankly, I can see no benefit from teaching that position, and without seeing it, I have a difficult time seeing it as being a natural stance.

To squat and lean back, most likely requires a base wider than shoulder width, which can get you called for an illegal screen if the defender gets caught up on the extended leg when going around.

The extended arms means first contact is with the arms of the screener, which can also get you called.

Seems to me to be a very bad technique even if it is perfectly done.

Remember screens are supposed to be a passive act, every thing about that stance is aggressive.

[riden]

Originally Posted by blindzebra

Frankly, I can see no benefit from teaching that position, and without seeing it, I have a difficult time seeing it as being a natural stance.

The benefit is you get your hands in a ready postion to receive a pass faster.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by riden

The benefit is you get your hands in a ready postion to receive a pass faster.

How is that a benefit when you're setting a screen? You ain't gonna get a pass.

[blindzebra]

Originally Posted by riden

The benefit is you get your hands in a ready postion to receive a pass faster.

There's no pass to receive when the ball is going the other way on the foul.

[A Pennsylvania Coach]

Originally Posted by blindzebra

Why coaches teach that or the hands at the throat, elbows out is beyond me.

We teach our players that technique so we can "catch" the defender in the notch. If that defender runs into the middle of the screener, it is a little tougher to get free and around because they are stuck in-between those extended elbows. IOW, rather than hitting the screen and then sliding around it, the defender almost has to put it in reverse to get clear of the elbows then go around. You'll hear "get 'em in the notch" in our practices regularly. I learned about it from a major D1 coach whose camps I've worked.

I agree that it is probably illegal by the strict interpretation of the rule. But the next time it gets called on us will be the first time, so we'll stick with it.