Closely guarded clarification

[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.

[inigo montoya]

Originally Posted by BayStateRef

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.

So four teammates can't cause a closely-guarded count to end, but one can? If A1 is screened by 1 teammates, with B1 within 6 feet, there is no count. But if A1's three remaining teammates show up, then the count begins? That's absurd.