Moving screen?

[egausch]

Ok, saw this recently, pretty typical sitch. Three player fast break, A1 on right w/ ball, A2 in middle, B1 on left, all spaced about 5 ft apart. Layup goes in but whistled off "moving screen"(might be better called as an illegal screen or illegal moving screen). Seems like the correct call. But here's the rub. B1 made absolutely no attempt to play the ball. B1 and A2 ran parallel paths all the way to the hoop. Does it matter? What if the spacing was larger? Does time and/or distance matter? Is this an advantage/judgement call or is it black and white. I've always taught/coached my players to set stationary screens and they can't move to block the defender. It's up to the screener's teammate to move to use the screen correctly. The screener must also keep all parts of his body within his defensive box. So, for this moving sitch, it seems I should coach my guys, when A2, to pull up and follow the play as a trail, etc., to avoid the call.
EG

[Mark Dexter]

Was there contact?

The key to illegal/moving screens is that there is no foul until non-incidental contact occurs.

[egausch]

No contact. So, are you saying that an illegal moving screen, is only whistled on the non-incidental contact and not on the "act" itself? In other words, it's legal for an offensive player to actively move to deny a defensive player access to the ball as long as not contact occurs?
EG

[Mark Dexter]

Originally posted by egausch
No contact. So, are you saying that an illegal moving screen, is only whistled on the non-incidental contact and not on the "act" itself? In other words, it's legal for an offensive player to actively move to deny a defensive player access to the ball as long as not contact occurs?
EG

You got it.

A personal foul is a contact foul. While standing in someone's path may be an illegal position, there is NO foul unless/until contact is made.

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by Mark Dexter

You got it.

A personal foul is a contact foul. While standing in someone's path may be an illegal position, there is NO foul unless/until contact is made.

I'm not quite sure you meant to word it that way, but I get
your drift (I think).

[Mark Dexter]

Yeah - I couldn't think of the precise wording, but I think this was fine.

[egausch]

So, for the above play, with no contact, the basket should have counted and no whistle!?!?
EG

[Mark Dexter]

Originally posted by egausch
So, for the above play, with no contact, the basket should have counted and no whistle!?!?
EG

Unless there was some weird occurrance you didn't see, yes.

If you get this ref again, you might want to just quietly suggest he take another look at 4-19-1 and 10.6.3A (which is very much like your play).

[egausch]

Thanks Mark. Another coach and I were watching in the stands for this one, but if it comes up in one of my games I'll now know enough to ask if there was contact.
EG

[bigwhistle]

Originally posted by egausch
Thanks Mark. Another coach and I were watching in the stands for this one, but if it comes up in one of my games I'll now know enough to ask if there was contact.
EG

Good approach coach. Don't quote a rule number to the official to look up, because he may then consider you a know-it-all who is trying to show you up. The place for quoting rule numbers is off the court over some refreshing beverages, not in the heat of battle.

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by Mark Dexter
Yeah - I couldn't think of the precise wording, but I think this was fine.

I think I'm havng trouble seeng how standing in someone's
path could be an illegal position? It's a nit, but it's
not the position that is illegal, it's whatever contact
results from having not attained legal guarding position.
But you've already made this point..

[Mark Dexter]

Originally posted by Dan_ref

I think I'm havng trouble seeng how standing in someone's
path could be an illegal position? It's a nit, but it's
not the position that is illegal, it's whatever contact
results from having not attained legal guarding position.
But you've already made this point..

It comes from the fact that standing is not the illegal act.

Let me attempt to re-write this:

B1 is in (or will be in) a position such that, if there were contact with A1, B1 would be charged with a foul. If A1 changes his path and there is no contact, there is no foul on B1 for forcing A1 to change his path.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by egausch
Ok, saw this recently, pretty typical sitch. Three player fast break, A1 on right w/ ball, A2 in middle, B1 on left, all spaced about 5 ft apart. Layup goes in but whistled off "moving screen"(might be better called as an illegal screen or illegal moving screen). Seems like the correct call. But here's the rub. B1 made absolutely no attempt to play the ball. B1 and A2 ran parallel paths all the way to the hoop. Does it matter? What if the spacing was larger? Does time and/or distance matter? Is this an advantage/judgement call or is it black and white. I've always taught/coached my players to set stationary screens and they can't move to block the defender. It's up to the screener's teammate to move to use the screen correctly. The screener must also keep all parts of his body within his defensive box. So, for this moving sitch, it seems I should coach my guys, when A2, to pull up and follow the play as a trail, etc., to avoid the call.
EG

Let me take a shot at this.I'd like to get at least one right this week.The concepts involved are(1)no contact=no foul(2)all 3 players can establish and maintain a legal straight-line path to the basket.It says above that the players are parallel,so the determining factor is who gets there first.Usually,if contact is made in a case like this,it is the fault of the player behind or from the side,not the player in front.So in this case,if A2 got in front of B1,the foul is on B1.Usually you ignore this call because you'd probably be taking away A1's basket on contact that didn't really affect the play.If B1 gets in front of A2,then,if contact is made,you could call a block on A2.Again,you have to consider whether B1 had a shot at getting to A1 to block his shot.If not,and the contact wasn't severe,I'd probably pass on this call also.If,as you say above,B1 was making absolutely no attempt to play the ball,I'd probably pass on any call for contact.That's just incidental contact that doesn't affect the play.
I think that this is the nit that Dan was picking.

[Dan_ref]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Mark Dexter

B1 is in (or will be in) a position such that, if there were contact with A1, B1 would be charged with a foul. If A1 changes his path and there is no contact, there is no foul on B1 for forcing A1 to change his path.

Are you studying contract law?

How about this: "While standing in someone's path may be an illegal position, there is NO foul unless/until contact is made."

[Slider]

I just wanted to add to Jurassic Referee's post:

If A2 gets ahead of B1, he may slow up and set a legal moving screen.

However, if A2 is ahead of B1 and then A2 changes path (cuts into B1's path), then A2 may still be guilty of a foul if contact occurs.

Also, if B1 were able to get ahead of A1, and then match paths (a legal "moving screen"), then B1 could slow up to try to hinder A1's drive to the basket.