Is This Player Control?

[kbilla]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

If a player with the ball pushes off with with his arm, would you call a block on his opponent too using the same principles?

If two players go up for a rebound and the player behind pushes the opponent with inside position to get the ball , I take it that's a block in your world too?

Lah me.......

You're trying to apply guarding principles to non-guarding situations.

Absolutely not, a push off is specifically addressed in the rulebook..your second case is a push, there is no PC so I am obviously not applying a guarding principle there...how do you define a guarding situation?

[rainmaker]

Originally Posted by kbilla

Absolutely not, a push off is specifically addressed in the rulebook..your second case is a push, there is no PC so I am obviously not applying a guarding principle there...how do you define a guarding situation?

4-23, and associated case book references.

[kbilla]

Originally Posted by rainmaker

4-23, and associated case book references.

Exactly and what does it say about a LGP? "Guarding is the act of legally placing the body in the path of an opponent."...then goes on to what the defender must have to obtain an LGP (including facing the offensive player). "Every player is entitled to a spot on the floor provided they get there first and without illegally contacting an opponent"...having your back to the opponent is counter to LGP, so if it isn't a "legal position", it has to be an "illegal position" wouldn't it?

In the OP, once there is control, I would say that the defender put themselves in the path of the opponent with the ball, whether or not they were already there seems to be irrelavent in this case if the principles of an LGP are not there, I am applying 10.6.9. I will grant you this is a "tough foul" to take, but unless the offensive player came down and shoved the defender out of the way, I would have a block or no call, would have to see it...

[rainmaker]

Originally Posted by kbilla

In the OP, once there is control, I would say that the defender put themselves in the path of the opponent, whether or not they were already there seems to be irrelavent in this case if the principles of an LGP are not there. I will grant you this is a "tough foul" to take, but unless the offensive player came down and shoved the defender out of the way, I would have a block or no call, would have to see it...

In the OP the poor "defender" was just standing there, and was reached over as the other player grabbed the ball and came down on top of the "defender". How the heck is that moving into the path of the opponent? The person who got the ball didn't have it when they went up. "Devender" was just there. That's all. If the guy who goes up and gets control of the ball then comes down on top of the "defender" it's PC. WHo initiated contact? Who moved, and who didn't? It's not really this difficult.

A1 is shooting one FT while B1 is behind him and not lined up. FT is missed and tapped around toward A1. B1 performs an athletic move, jumps up and over A1 without touching him, secures the ball with both hands in the air, then comes down and fouls A1 in an "over the back" kind of way.

[kbilla]

Originally Posted by rainmaker

In the OP the poor "defender" was just standing there, and was reached over as the other player grabbed the ball and came down on top of the "defender". How the heck is that moving into the path of the opponent? The person who got the ball didn't have it when they went up. "Devender" was just there. That's all. If the guy who goes up and gets control of the ball then comes down on top of the "defender" it's PC. WHo initiated contact? Who moved, and who didn't? It's not really this difficult.

But if you determine that the player didn't commit a foul in obtaining control of the ball, then how can you not just as easily say the "poor offensive player" made a great play and just landed and someone got in his/her way?

[kbilla]

Originally Posted by rainmaker

In the OP the poor "defender" was just standing there, and was reached over as the other player grabbed the ball and came down on top of the "defender". How the heck is that moving into the path of the opponent? The person who got the ball didn't have it when they went up. "Devender" was just there. That's all. If the guy who goes up and gets control of the ball then comes down on top of the "defender" it's PC. WHo initiated contact? Who moved, and who didn't? It's not really this difficult.

A1 is shooting one FT while B1 is behind him and not lined up. FT is missed and tapped around toward A1. B1 performs an athletic move, jumps up and over A1 without touching him, secures the ball with both hands in the air, then comes down and fouls A1 in an "over the back" kind of way.

I believe the issue is how each of us applies the "guarding" definition...the definition only says that a defender "puts themselves in the path", it doesn't say that they have to actively be doing anything....intentionally or not, A1 put him/herself in the path...from there it would seem that guarding principles would apply...

[rainmaker]

Originally Posted by kbilla

But if you determine that the player didn't commit a foul in obtaining control of the ball, then how can you not just as easily say the "poor offensive player" made a great play and just landed and someone got in his/her way?

You can try. But you won't ever move up if that's how you read the OP. If he comes down on someone who was just standing there, (didn't "get in the way"), it's a foul pure and simple. It's not a great play, it's a foul

. Look at the OP. The person who got fouled didn't move to get in front of the person with the ball. He was just standing there, because he'd just shot the ball. He may have reached up or even jumped up to try to get the ball, but that doesn't mean he's "guarding". IT means he was going for the ball. He's allowed to "maintain his spot" if he jumps straight up. His spot goes all the way to the ceiling. WHen B reached into A's spot to get the ball it was legal until there was contact, then it became B's foul. Since he had control of the ball, it was a PC foul.

The way this play is called is PC foul. You don't discuss this, except to understand it so you can do it correctly. It's just the way it is.

[rainmaker]

Originally Posted by kbilla

I believe the issue is how each of us applies the "guarding" definition...the definition only says that a defender "puts themselves in the path", it doesn't say that they have to actively be doing anything....intentionally or not, A1 put him/herself in the path...from there it would seem that guarding principles would apply...

You can't use your own definitions of the words. You have to go by how they are commonly interpreted. In the OP A didn't "put himself" in path of the guy with the ball. He just didn't. See it how you like. But if you called this play a block, you'll be laughed right out of your association. Even a no-call would be questionable in the OP. Whether you like it or not, that's how it's done.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by kbilla

I agree with you re: the loose ball situation, but in this case the official called a PC foul. I guess I viewed this the same way as a ball handler running into a player who was standing with their back to the ball handler, do you have a PC foul on that also?

What is the definition of a player control foul? It is a common foul committed by a play who is in control of the ball. That is what happened in this play. Not all player control fouls are charging fouls. If B1 did not have control of the ball and just jumped onto A1 to get the rebound, B1 would still be guilty of committing a common foul, not just a player control foul.

MTD, Sr.

[kbilla]

Originally Posted by rainmaker

You can try. But you won't ever move up if that's how you read the OP. If he comes down on someone who was just standing there, (didn't "get in the way"), it's a foul pure and simple. It's not a great play, it's a foul

. Look at the OP. The person who got fouled didn't move to get in front of the person with the ball. He was just standing there, because he'd just shot the ball. He may have reached up or even jumped up to try to get the ball, but that doesn't mean he's "guarding". IT means he was going for the ball. He's allowed to "maintain his spot" if he jumps straight up. His spot goes all the way to the ceiling. WHen B reached into A's spot to get the ball it was legal until there was contact, then it became B's foul. Since he had control of the ball, it was a PC foul.

The way this play is called is PC foul. You don't discuss this, except to understand it so you can do it correctly. It's just the way it is.

Here we go again, I don't recall asking you for an evaluation, nor did I ask you to tell me how to call it. Why can't people on this board just go back and forth with good debate about interpretations without making stupid confrontational comments?

What if B1 had come to the floor and taken a dribble right into A1 who still had his/her back turned and you have contact, what do you have then? A1 is still "just standing there", do you consider that they are "guarding" yet?

All I am saying is that this case is not as cut and dry as you seem to make it IMO. Let's just agree to disagree. I know you're not going to recommend me to work the state finals now, I guess I'll just have to live with that...

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by kbilla

i have a block. i don't believe i have ever called or seen called a PC foul when the defender has his back to the ballhandler...4-7-2-a "a player is moving with the ball is required to stop or change direction to avoid contact if a defensive player has obtained an LGP", doesn't say anything about having to avoid anyone who does not have LGP...then 4.23.2 defines LGP and includes that the "front of the guard's torso must be facing the opponent"...

if the opponent has their back to the ball handler would you apply the same criteria as an opponent facing a ball handler to determine if you have a block/charge?

Why in the world would you call a block? A1 beats B1 and runs into B2 who has a legal position on the floor. Yes B2 is not guarding A1 but since he has a legal position on the court, he is considered to be setting a screen which A1 must go around without making illegal contact with B2.

MTD, Sr.

[rainmaker]

kbilla, look at the rulebook, reference 4-23-1 . There is a sentence right there that says, "Every player is entitled to a spot on the playing court provided such player gets there first without illegally contacting the opponent." Also look at 10.6.1 Sit A in the case book. The A's and B's are backward from the OP, otherwise, it's the same play, and it's PC.

[rainmaker]

Originally Posted by kbilla

Here we go again, I don't recall asking you for an evaluation, nor did I ask you to tell me how to call it. Why can't people on this board just go back and forth with good debate about interpretations without making stupid confrontational comments?.

Because it's not a "good debate about interpretations". There are common ways that this play is called, and you don't like them. That's you being difficult, not discussion.

You asked "why can't..." and "what if..." so I told you why you can't and what would happen if. You can disagree if you want to. I'm not the one that'll lose games because of your wrong calls.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by kbilla

Case 10.6.9 discusses this further..

10.6.9 says that A1 has established a straight line path. If there is a defender in this straight line, then a path was never established.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by kbilla

But if you determine that the player didn't commit a foul in obtaining control of the ball, then how can you not just as easily say the "poor offensive player" made a great play and just landed and someone got in his/her way?

That is just the point all of us have been making. A1 has a legal position in front of B1. B1 jumps into A1's cylinder of verticality and makes contact with A1 and displaces A1. That is a common foul by B1. If B1 has control of the ball at the time of the foul, then the common foul by B1 is a player control foul. B1 did not make a great play; he went airborne in such a manner that made him land on top of A1 who had a legal position on the court prior to B1 going airborne. B1 has to have control of his body and in this play he did not.

MTD, Sr.