I posted this on the other board, I just wanted to see the opinions of the people who do not necessarily post on both boards. I love ya Tony, but I already know how you feel.


This is what I do not understand. The NF in the POE used the language "moving screen" as a discription of illegal contact. But "moving screen" is one of those things that coaches complain is happening without much contact, like "over the back." And the term "moving screen" is no where in the rulebook other than the POE. The language to me of "moving screen" suggests that all you need is for a screen to be moving, rather than some kind of contact or displacement to even take place. Because I could be moving away from a defender while making my screen, and contact can occur. Does that mean I should be whistled for a foul if I was in a screen and moving away from an on coming defender? That is usually what happens on pick and roll. Is it me, or is the terminology flawed?

I don't believe that you do. :)

Jeff, I said it but maybe you didn't understand what I was saying. I don't necessarily agree with the terminology either. I was simply trying to point out, on the other board, that there was no need to slam a regular poster on this board for using the terminology when the NF uses it as well. Keep in mind that contact does not have to occur for a screen to occur. However, contact does have to occur for an illegal screen to occur. Again, the only time I use moving screen is in reference to 4-39-6. I do not use the term to describe an illegal screen, even though the NF does.

In short, I AGREE WITH YOU!!!! :)

Rut,

I am not sure that the NF means for this issue to be grouped with "illegal contact". The heading for the POE is Rough Play. Under moving screens, they list 2 items (1) screener must be stationary upon contact, and (2) it is not a moving screen unless there is contact.

It seems that in order for rough play to be addressed in this issue, the screens that are in question are those where the screener throws a shoulder or elbow as the defender tries to avoid the screen. This would be the type of rough play that needs to be eliminated. The hard contact by the defender into a legal screener can be expected if the defender never knew the screen was coming, and this is addressed as not being a foul.

By being stationary in the POE, the rules committee is probably (just my guess) trying to make everyone aware of the elbows, knees, and forearm shivers that occur illegally. Many times these are very severe in nature.

As for the 2nd part, it is like a boxer who swings and misses. Since this is not a part of a fight, you can't penalize a screener who attemps to make an illegal screen by moving, but fails. He/she only should be given a foul if they are successful in making the illegal contact.

JRutledge,

I too thought that using the term "moving screen" in the NFHS rulebook was unfortunate. That is one of those terms that many ignorant coaches use along with "over the back" and "reaching in."

Z

Rookie Here....I see moving screens all the time in 6th - 8th grade games....I hear the bench gorilla (Coach) over there yelling "moving screen, moving screen". Two questions:

A) do I go over to my rules challenged friend and explain no contact = screen ok or should I leave him alone....I guess that goes for other sitch's where there is a clear deficiency in rules understanding (3 secs, OTB, etc)

B) My guess on the correct call if there is contact is either blocking or hold on the offense. Comments?

Larks - Veteran In Training

A) Not during the game. “Coach I will be happy to explain moving screen contact rule to you after we finish the game.”


B) No call, or push/charge (non PC) on offense. If it is contact from the blind side than it is always on the O if the D is stationary or moving away from O. Never is it a block on D. If D moves into O it is a push/charge. If they are moving towards each other I would no call it or double foul it.