Legal Guarding Position

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by mick

Ah, but if the kid fell down on Count-1, with his head within 5' of the ball handler and his feet 10'-10" away from the dribbler, I am guessing Counts-2 thru 5 could become, at least a bit, tedious.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by mick

No. I end my 5-count and start a 10-count.

Mick, that was really funny.

BTW, why would a dribbler stand there long enough to start a count at all?

Peace

[CoachP]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Rule 4-23-3(a) isn't relevant or doesn't apply?

I fail to see anything (yet) in 4-23 that dismisses he has LGP within a maximum of 6 feet.

I also do not see the word "actively guarding" (yet).

The only place I see a 5 count terminated is during an interuppted dribble. (other than the 6 ft max)

Originally Posted by Mick

Ah, but if the kid fell down on Count-1, with his head within 5' of the ball handler and his feet 10'-10" away from the dribbler, I am guessing Counts-2 thru 5 could become, at least a bit, tedious.

Only if B1 stays down for 4 more seconds!


The cool thing is, as was stated before, either B1 will be back on his feet, or A1 will be past him before this question would ever need to come into play.

...and it also keeps my nose in the book.

[OHBBREF]

when B1 gets up are you required to finish with the Standing 8 count?

[deecee]

Originally Posted by CoachP

I fail to see anything (yet) in 4-23 that dismisses he has LGP within a maximum of 6 feet.

I also do not see the word "actively guarding" (yet).

The only place I see a 5 count terminated is during an interuppted dribble. (other than the 6 ft max)


Only if B1 stays down for 4 more seconds!


The cool thing is, as was stated before, either B1 will be back on his feet, or A1 will be past him before this question would ever need to come into play.

...and it also keeps my nose in the book.

go ahead and continue your count -- it doesnt matter -- Im sure old skool will be along to agree with you which is pretty much the kiss of death

[TRef21]

Originally Posted by Dan_ref

Sounds like your friend could use some new sneakers.

Where is that sneaker selling guy?

LOL! Tell him to go buy some Staburys

[CoachP]

Originally Posted by deecee

go ahead and continue your count -- it doesnt matter -- Im sure old skool will be along to agree with you which is pretty much the kiss of death

Well, based on what's in the rule book, tell me why should the count be terminated?

I gave my case, convince me of yours. Official to coach.

[deecee]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

I'll only copy this, and only as an aid to further discussion....

NFHS rule 4-23-3(a)--"After the initial legal guarding position is obtained, the guard may have one or both feet on the playing court or be airborne, provided he/she has inbound status."

Fwiw, I agree with you btw. Other esteemed members don't.

JR has mentioned it several times -- are 1 or both feet on the ground?

where is the expectation of defense with a player on the ground?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by deecee

JR has mentioned it several times -- are 1 or both feet on the ground?

where is the expectation of defense with a player on the ground?

a player on the floor is quite likely to have one or both feet touching the floor. Frankly, I think a case can be made by rule to have a count continue.

[deecee]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

a player on the floor is quite likely to have one or both feet touching the floor. Frankly, I think a case can be made by rule to have a count continue.

very nimble player with very flexible ankles.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by deecee

very nimble player with very flexible ankles.

How so? Nothing says the bottom of his feet have to be touching the floor; only that his feet have to be on the floor. Lay on the floor and tell me where your feet naturally lay.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

How so? Nothing says the bottom of his feet have to be touching the floor; only that his feet have to be on the floor. Lay on the floor and tell me where your feet naturally lay.

So what you are saying is, when a player falls to the floor, their feet stay on the floor at all times?

Peace

[deecee]

this is where the rule book and common sense meet and a lot of officials get lost in the intersection.

its ok snaq and coach p thats how you can do it -- i sure as heck wont.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

So what you are saying is, when a player falls to the floor, their feet stay on the floor at all times?

Peace

No, but while they're not on the floor, they're most likely airborne.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by deecee

this is where the rule book and common sense meet and a lot of officials get lost in the intersection.
its ok snaq and coach p thats how you can do it -- i sure as heck wont.

Didn't say that's how I'd call it, I'm only saying that an argument could be made. I'm still not sure, frankly; although it's probably a had-to-be-there thing. If the player slips momentarily and continues to actively guard the dribbler, I'll probably continue my count. If he falls flat on his face and just lays there; I'll probably stop play for an injury timeout.
Oh, and you can't accuse those of us trying to actually see what the rule says of being like Old School and then turn around and offer your comment in red; which is a lot closer to OS's rules philosophy.