PC or Block

[ScottParks]

Bringing this over from another board.

Is it a block or charge if player A (with the ball) runs into player B after B has established legal guarding position except that B has one foot inbounds and one foot out of bounds?

[Danvrapp]

PC!

Is it a foul if B1 grabs A1's arm assuming B1's OOB? Same difference, I should think.

[rgaudreau]

Originally posted by parkssa
Bringing this over from another board.

Is it a block or charge if player A (with the ball) runs into player B after B has established legal guarding position except that B has one foot inbounds and one foot out of bounds?

Has legal guarding position REALLY been established if B1 is standing out of bounds?

My guess is no.... foul on B1.

Ren

[Mark Padgett]

Originally posted by parkssa
Bringing this over from another board.

Is it a block or charge if player A (with the ball) runs into player B after B has established legal guarding position except that B has one foot inbounds and one foot out of bounds?

I'm going to weasel out on this one and not give an answer this early in the thread, but here is some food for thought. If A1 punches B1 during play while B1 is standing with one (or both) feet OOB, is it a flagrant foul or a no-call. And - is there a difference if the contact would have just been a common foul?

And - don't flame me for weaseling out. Homer Simpson said that weaseling out of things is what separates us from the animals - except the weasel.

[Danvrapp]

Originally posted by rgaudreau
Has legal guarding position REALLY been established if B1 is standing out of bounds?

My guess is no.... foul on B1.

Ren

My guess is you've never played for a coach who told you to stick that one let OOB to cut off baseline.

[ChuckElias]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Mark Padgett

If A1 punches B1 during play while B1 is standing with one (or both) feet OOB, is it a flagrant foul or a no-call.

Mark, I just don't get the connection here. Any punch by any team member (player, substiute, coach, trainer, scorer) anywhere in the gym is a flagrant foul. What would it matter if the punched player were in bounds or OOB? If any official ever had a situation where a punch was thrown during the game and he had a no-call, I don't think he'd be officiating anymore.

Am I missing your point, or was that the point that you were trying to make?

And - don't flame me for weaseling out. Homer Simpson said that weaseling out of things is what separates us from the animals - except the weasel.

I love this quote. I love the Simpsons. Sort of a "guilty pleasure". You know it's bad for you, but you can't stay away. My wife hates the Simpsons. But when she watches them, she laughs out loud every time.

Chuck

[rockyroad]

If the defensive player has established legal guarding position and is forcing the ball handler to move back and forth across the court (full-court press scenario) and the ball handler lowers his/her shoulder and plows the defender close to the sideline, you are going to call a block and tell the coach it was because their defender had one foot on the sideline?? I think not...that has got to be a PC call...if A1's momentum on a fast break lay-in takes him oob under the basket and then b2 clobbers him are we not calling that because A1 was oob?? I am confused as to why this wouldn't be a pc call right away...

[Barry C. Morris]

Establishing a defensive position with one foot on the line is not "leaving the court for an unauthorized reason". This is a legal defensive position and A1 should be hit with a PC foul.

[BktBallRef]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by ChuckElias

Originally posted by Mark Padgett

Mark, I just don't get the connection here. Any punch by any team member (player, substiute, coach, trainer, scorer) anywhere in the gym is a flagrant foul.

Just to clarify, as we talked about this in another post last week, this is not a flagrant foul. It is a flagrant technical foul. 10-3-10

[Mark Padgett]

Originally posted by ChuckElias

Mark, I just don't get the connection here. Any punch by any team member (player, substiute, coach, trainer, scorer) anywhere in the gym is a flagrant foul. What would it matter if the punched player were in bounds or OOB? If any official ever had a situation where a punch was thrown during the game and he had a no-call, I don't think he'd be officiating anymore.

Am I missing your point, or was that the point that you were trying to make?

Chuck [/B]

Chuckster - you got it. The point I was trying to make was that fouls are not necessarily based on the fact of whether the fouled player was inbounds or not, in fact, they're not even necessarily based on whether the player was in the game or not.

As to The Simpsons, I feel kind of the same way about The Three Stooges. However, my wife thinks The Three Stooges is a documentary.

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by Mark Padgett

Chuckster - you got it. The point I was trying to make was that fouls are not necessarily based on the fact of whether the fouled player was inbounds or not, in fact, they're not even necessarily based on whether the player was in the game or not.

As to The Simpsons, I feel kind of the same way about The Three Stooges. However, my wife thinks The Three Stooges is a documentary.

[/B]

Speaking of off the topic, did any of you see South Park
tonight? Both my kids made me watch it. It was maybe
THE funniest thing I have ever seen on TV, period.
The topic was Osama bin whatzitz, if you get it on your
cable you need to see it.

[Gary Brendemuehl]

Originally posted by rgaudreau

Has legal guarding position REALLY been established if B1 is standing out of bounds?

My guess is no.... foul on B1.

Ren

Let's go to the book! 4-23 defines guarding and legal guarding position. No where in this section is in or out-of-bounds referenced. Only the floor is referenced, not the court or a location on it. Where the book says ".. The guard must have both feet touching the floor. ..." are you going to interprete that as meaning "... touching the floor and inbounds"?

Further, once legal guarding position is obtained, article 3 applies and reads:

Art 3 ... After the initial guarding position is obtained:

a. The guard is not required to have either or both feet on the floor or continue facing the opponent.

OK, so if you previously interpreted "on the floor" as implying inbounds, then once legal guarding position is obtained, then to be consistant you need to interprete 4-23-3a as not requiring both feet to be inbounds and the defender could be OOB and still have legal guarding position

So, unless someone can show me where the floor means the inbounds area of the court, I've got a PC.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally posted by Barry C. Morris
Establishing a defensive position with one foot on the line is not "leaving the court for an unauthorized reason". This is a legal defensive position and A1 should be hit with a PC foul.

The play described in the original posting as always been one that I could never come to grips with, but Barry's evaluation really hit the nail on the head and I intend to incorporate it into my class instruction and guarding and screening.

[Peter Devana]

Mark,
I can't agree with you on this one.! I think you should rethink it.
I don't believe the intent of the rules would consider a defensive player to be maintaining a legal defensive guarding position while part of him / her are standing OOB.
I would call the foul on the defence.
Pistol

[RecRef]

Originally posted by Peter Devana
Mark,
I can't agree with you on this one.! I think you should rethink it.
I don't believe the intent of the rules would consider a defensive player to be maintaining a legal defensive guarding position while part of him / her are standing OOB.
I would call the foul on the defence.
Pistol

Like the lack of a proper casebook example for the throw-in plane, T or not to T, after the ball has been released and hit, we are in need of direction from above on this one.

Lacking a definitive answer in book or manual I’ll tell why I feel it is a PC call.

A defensive player can legally be out of bounds. Why else would the Simplified and Illustrated make such a strong point, with a picture in 7.1.1 (Out of Bounds section) of a defender having only 1 foot inbounds when the ball handler touches him? If the defender were not legal, than the play would have been over long before the touch.

Then there is the misunderstanding, IMHO, of the use of the term “legal guarding position (LGP).” I have always read the term as saying that after a defender has established and maintained what the rules calls LGP then any contact is a call against the offensive player. This is very different from believing that LGP must be obtained before there can be an offensive foul. - B2 is guarding A2 and has his back to A1 who is driving towards the lane. B2 has not assumed LGP on A1; he does not even know where A1 is. Can A1 legally charge into B2? No, because B2 is entitled to his space on the floor. The same can be said in the situation where A1 runs up the back of B1 who is moving in the same direction of A1 but has never established LGP.

Even before Rule 1 in the Rules Book we have “THE INTENT AND PURPOSE OF THE RULES” section (caps in the book). Here we run into advantage/disadvantage. Now the questions to ask are what advantage does the defender gain by having a foot on the line, or over the line? And to what disadvantage has the ball handler been put? The answer to both is none. Why none, because of 7.2.c, which we will call the 3 Foot rule for lack of a better term. The defender already has legally closed down the path by being with 3 foot of the line.

If anything the defender has taken his legal advantage away from himself by being on the line. What is the width of the average male HS player? Lets say 18 to 20 inches. To that we can add 4 inches for each arm, which are down to protect vital parts. We are now looking at 2ft 4inches. So, if we could freeze the play and draw a line 5ft 4in from the sideline, we would have a so called “line in the sand.” If crossed by the ball handler, any contact will result in a PC.

Whew! -RecRef