Closely guarded clarification

[BayStateRef]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Can you please provide a citation that supports your expressed OPINION?

Rule 4-23-1. Guarding is the act of legally placing the body in the path of the offensive opponent. There is no minimum distance required between the guard and the opponent.

[Adam]

That's all you've got? Not enough.

[BayStateRef]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

That's all you've got? Not enough.

The rule speaks for itself. It does not need any amplification. I certainly would like this...any many other Fed rules to be crystal clear, but it is what we have.

In order to have a closely guarded count, the offensive player must be continuously guarded. I posted the definition of guarded. It requires a player and an opponent in that player's path. Once another offensive player is in that path, that "first" player is no longer guarded.

You don't have to accept my word. It is what I have been taught repeatedly and there is no rule or casebook play that says otherwise.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by BayStateRef

The rule speaks for itself. It does not need any amplification. I certainly would like this...any many other Fed rules to be crystal clear, but it is what we have.

In order to have a closely guarded count, the offensive player must be continuously guarded. I posted the definition of guarded. It requires a player and an opponent in that player's path. Once another offensive player is in that path, that "first" player is no longer guarded.

You don't have to accept my word. It is what I have been taught repeatedly and there is no rule or casebook play that says otherwise.

The reason that we don't accept your word is that you are incorrect. Sorry that you won't accept that.

[BayStateRef]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

The reason that we don't accept your word is that you are incorrect. Sorry that you won't accept that.

I accept that you do not agree. And I have no problem with that.

This is a simple and common situation. A player is dribbling, closely guarded, and moves behind a screen, and comes out the other side a second or two later. Simple question: does the count end or continue?

Yet, there is no single case book play that deals with it. I cite the plain language of the rule. You cite case book plays that do not directly address this regular occurance. As I said, I have been instructed repeatedly that the count ends when the screen intervenes.

I have read the cases you cite...and others. I can find nothing to make me question the interpreter that has instructed me.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by BayStateRef

Yet, there is no single case book play that deals with it.

This case play certainly makes it clear that a closely guarded count continues when there are players between the guard and the player with the ball, even in the most extreme of circumstances.
SCREENING TEAMMATES
9.10.1 SITUATION D: Team A, while in possession of the ball in its frontcourt: (a) positions four players parallel with the sideline and they pass the ball from one to another with their arms reaching beyond the sideline plane; or (b) has four teammates surround dribbler A1. In both (a) and (b), the opponents are unable to get close to the ball. RULING: This is considered to be a closely-guarded situation and a violation in five seconds in both (a) and (b), if any B player is within 6 feet of the ball or within 6 feet of the screening teammates and is attempting to gain control of the ball. Preventing opponents from getting to the ball by using screening teammates becomes a violation in five seconds if the opponents are attempting to gain control.

How can you dispute that? The NFHS comment is very clear here.

[BayStateRef]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

This case play certainly makes it clear that a closely guarded count continues when there are players between the guard and the player with the ball, even in the most extreme of circumstances.
....
How can you dispute that? The NFHS comment is very clear here.

Because both the rule and the casebook refer to "teammates" (plural.)

Your citation is about the extrme...when many teammates (the casebook says four; the rule simply says "teammates") are involved. There is no casebook play...or any rule...that says the count continues if a single screening teammate is involved.

As others have said, the NCAA rule is crystal clear and says the count stops. The Fed rule is murky...and subject to all this debate. I am not the rules interpreter for my board, so I follow his instruction. I have disagreed with his rulings in the past...and probably will again. But on this play...in my games...I will end the count when a single player screen comes between the defender and the dribbler.

[Kelvin green]

Originally Posted by BayStateRef

I accept that you do not agree. And I have no problem with that.

This is a simple and common situation. A player is dribbling, closely guarded, and moves behind a screen, and comes out the other side a second or two later. Simple question: does the count end or continue?

Yet, there is no single case book play that deals with it. I cite the plain language of the rule. You cite case book plays that do not directly address this regular occurance. As I said, I have been instructed repeatedly that the count ends when the screen intervenes.

I have read the cases you cite...and others. I can find nothing to make me question the interpreter that has instructed me.

Think you and your interpreter need to relook at the rule book closely

1) if any B player is within 6 feet of the ball or within 6 feet of the screening teammates and is attempting to gain control of the ball. Preventing opponents from getting to the ball by using screening teammates becomes a violation in five seconds if the opponents are attempting to gain control.

2) Multiple defenders. The count should continue even if there is a defensive switch, provided the six-foot distance is maintained. There is no requirement for the defensive player to remain the same during the count as long as the offensive player is closely guarded throughout.

Normally in a screening situation (unless I ve missed some basic basketball,
1) The defender either goes around the screen and continues to guard the player and as long as he wiithin six feet (of the dribbler) or the screener and continues to guard it is a violation

2) There is a defensive switch and as long as both defenders maintained the 6 feet the count continues. Some may like the NCAA rule better, but for now until the rule is changed it is the rule.

This may sound terrible, but this is what gets us in trouble. If we make stuff up that just aint there we contribute to the myths and the "inconsistency" that coaches $itch about"

[JoeTheRef]

Originally Posted by Kelvin green

Think you and your interpreter need to relook at the rule book closely

1) if any B player is within 6 feet of the ball or within 6 feet of the screening teammates and is attempting to gain control of the ball. Preventing opponents from getting to the ball by using screening teammates becomes a violation in five seconds if the opponents are attempting to gain control.

2) Multiple defenders. The count should continue even if there is a defensive switch, provided the six-foot distance is maintained. There is no requirement for the defensive player to remain the same during the count as long as the offensive player is closely guarded throughout.

Normally in a screening situation (unless I ve missed some basic basketball,
1) The defender either goes around the screen and continues to guard the player and as long as he wiithin six feet (of the dribbler) or the screener and continues to guard it is a violation

2) There is a defensive switch and as long as both defenders maintained the 6 feet the count continues. Some may like the NCAA rule better, but for now until the rule is changed it is the rule.

This may sound terrible, but this is what gets us in trouble. If we make stuff up that just aint there we contribute to the myths and the "inconsistency" that coaches $itch about"

DGP!!! Darn good post.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

That's all you've got? Not enough.

Especially since the very next sentence is, "There is no minimum distance required between the guard and opponent, but the maximum is 6 feet when closely guarded."

I'll also add this case play:

9.10.1 SITUATION C: Team A has the ball in its own frontcourt. B1 stands within 6 feet and facing A1 while A1 is holding the ball near the division line. RULING: In five seconds this would be a violation. In the situation outlined, as soon as B1 has assumed a guarding position, both feet on the court, facing the opponent, no other specific requirement is in effect. The amount of movement or the actual body position of the player is irrelevant.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by BayStateRef

Rule 4-23-1. Guarding is the act of legally placing the body in the path of the offensive opponent. There is no minimum distance required between the guard and the opponent.

1) If you have a 5-second count going and the dribbler then turns sideways and heads for a sideline, and the defender keeps pace with the dribbler and stays within 6 feet, does the count stop because the defender is no longer in the path of the dribbler?

2) If you have a 5-second count going on a dribbler and the dribbler turns and dribbles backwards, and the defender still maintains the 6 foot distance at all times, does the count stop because the defender is no longer in the dribbler's path?

3) If you have a 5-second count going on a player holding the ball, and that player then pivots so that his back is to the defender, does the 5-second count stop because the defender is no longer in the path of the offensive player with the ball?

You're claiming that the rule must be enforced literally by the plain language of the rule? Does that include all three of these situations then in your opinion?

[BayStateRef]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

You're claiming that the rule must be enforced literally by the plain language of the rule? Does that include all three of these situations then in your opinion?

To me, the path is a line between the defender and the dribbler, not between the dribbler and the basket (which is what your examples imply). Assuming we are in the front court, it does not matter what the dribbler does ...or which way the dribbler moves...as long as the defender is within 6 feet and there is no intervening screen. That makes it closely guarded. So I would have a closely guarded count in each example you cite.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by BayStateRef

To me, the path is a line between the defender and the dribbler, not between the dribbler and the basket (which is what your examples imply). Assuming we are in the front court, it does not matter what the dribbler does ...or which way the dribbler moves...as long as the defender is within 6 feet and there is no intervening screen. That makes it closely guarded. So I would have a closely guarded count in each example you cite.

And therein lies the rub......

Can you cite any language that will back up your statement that an intervening screen actually does stop a closely-guarded count? Rule 4-23-1 can't apply because a literal reading of that rule says that the defender must be "in the path".

Btw, this thread is deja vu all over again.

mFive Second Count Screen

Also btw, in that thread an un-named miscreant who is also an IAABO rules interpreter for his board disagrees with the IAABO rules interpreter of your board. He states that the count should continue. And both IAABO rules interpreters are in the same state too.

It might be a good idea for someone to get a definitive answer on this from your head IAABO interpreter/poobah (not that his interpretation is valid for the rest of us anyway).

[BayStateRef]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Also btw, in that thread an un-named miscreant who is also an IAABO rules interpreter for his board disagrees with the IAABO rules interpreter of your board. He states that the count should continue. And both IAABO rules interpreters are in the same state too.

It might be a good idea for someone to get a definitive answer on this from your head IAABO interpreter/poobah (not that his interpretation is valid for the rest of us anyway).

The IAABO position has been posted here. It says the count ends. But...I will ask and post the results when I hear.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by BayStateRef

The IAABO position has been posted here. It says the count ends. But...I will ask and post the results when I hear.

Yabut, as I said you've got one IAABO rules interpreter that says the count doesn't end. And I gotta tell you that particular IAABO interpreter is probably as rules-knowledgeable imo as you'll find anywhere. And I say that not just because he happens to agree with my position either.

That's why it will be interesting to see what the IAABO head interpreter will say about this one.