Closely guarded clarification
 

I have poked through prior threads and never really found an answer to this question: A3 is being closely guarded by B4. A2 sets a screen for A3 while defender B4 remains within six feet of A3, closely working around the screen. What is the correct call by rule? Does the closely guarded count continue? Or, is the closely guarded count discontinued once another player is positioned between the player in control and a closely guarding opponent?

NFHS = the count continues
NCAA = the count ceases

As long as the defender stays in front of the ball handler (or another defender) and is within 6 feet, you continue the count until the ball handler passes, shoots and picks up a dribble (or starts a dribble) to start another count. Of course a count can end if the ball handler gets their head and shoulders beyond the defender or the defender backs off more than 6 feet.

Peace

Five Second Count With Screen
 

I've been researching this since a coach asked me about it in a scrimmage a few weeks ago. After going through the NFHS Rule Book, and Case Book, I'm 95% sure that the five second count continues even as the dribbler and the defender are separted by a screener, as long as they stay within six feet of each other. I say 95% sure because I can't find anything that says otherwise in a NFHS publication.

That said, the 5% uncertainty in my mind comes from only a single source, not a NFHS source, but an IAABO source:

2005 IAABO Refresher Exam - Question 22: A-1 is holding the ball in the front court and is closely guarded by B-1. As the official count is at two, A-2 takes and holds a position between A-1 and B-1. Official discontinues the 5 second closely guarded violating count. Is the official correct. Answer Yes, Citations 4-10, 4-23-1.

Even though I'm not an NCAA official, I do know with 100% certainty, that the count is stopped in NCAA:

NCAA 4-13-4: "When a player is positioned between the player in control of the ball and his or her opponent, who is within 6 feet (men) or 3 feet (women), a closely guarded situation does not exist.

For high school games governed by NFHS rules, I can't explain the Refresher Exam answer. My local board interpreter insists that there is not a mistake in the anser key, so it appears that for those of us who are members of IAABO, we stop the count, based solely on one test question on one Refresher Exam.

Help! Please help! I'm so confused!

The 2004-05 POE states precisely when to stop a closely-guarded count. The intervention of a screener is not one of the listed reasons.

1. Closely guarded. Well-officiated closely-guarded situations provide for better balance between offense and defense. When the closely guarded rules are not followed, there is a significant advantage for the offense. The following four areas are to be emphasized:
A. When to start. A closely guarded situation occurs when a player in control of the ball in his or her team's front court, is guarded by an opponent who is within six feet of that player who is holding or dribbling the ball. It should also be emphasized that the defensive player must obtain a legal guarding position.
A player shall not hold the ball for five seconds or dribble the ball for five seconds while closely guarded in his or her front court. A player can legally hold the ball while closely guarded for four seconds, dribble the ball for four seconds and hold the ball again for four seconds before violating.
B. When to stop. A closely-guarded count ends when no defensive player is within six feet. The count also stops when a closely guarded player (a) completes a dribble anywhere in the team's own front court; (b) starts a dribble in the team's own frontcourt and ends it anywhere in the frontcourt (a new five-second count will start if the player holds the ball); (c) loses possession of the ball for any reason in the team's own frontcourt; or (d) has his or her dribble interrupted. If a closely-guarded player beats the defender(s) by getting head and shoulders past the defensive player, the count has ended.
C. 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.
D. Counting mechanics. Emphasis should be placed on the official to begin a visible count when the six-foot distance is established. The official must switch arms when going directly from one counting situation to another.


Additionally, there is this case book play dealing with screening teammates.

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.

If a screener comes between the dribbler and the defender, the dribbler is no longer closely guarded and the count stops. In order to legally guard a player, you -- or any other defensive player -- must be in the dribbler's path. If an offensive player is in the path, that player is no longer guarded...closely or not.

For those who are pretending otherwise...take the scenario. If a player gets the ball behind a screen, do you start a closely guarded count, even if the defender is within 6 feet? I hope not.

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

What you say is true for an NCAA game, but not at the NFHS level as the citations that I provided in my last post demonstrate. Until you counter those with some written documentation, you cannot be considered correct.

I suggest that you reconsider your position.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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"

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 <b>holding</b> 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?

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.

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 <b>literal</b> reading of that rule says that the defender must be "in the path".

Btw, this thread is <i>deja vu</i> all over again.

mhttp://forum.officiating.com/showthread.php?t=40200

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.

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.

I am in the camp that keeps this count going as long as the screened defender(s) stays within the required 6', even after being screened or switching guards.

My count will not end until the dribbler creates separation from the guard to a distance outside of 6' if moving laterally toward the sideline or back toward the HC line.... or until his head and shoulders are past the defender on a drive toward the basket.

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.

DGP!!! Darn good post. :D

Indeed it is. But it is another thread from 2004, (http://forum.officiating.com/showthread.php?t=16260) not the one you cite from a few weeks ago, where your un-named guy made his case.

I went back to the 2004 thread and found I was making the same case as a few other officials. We were in the minority then...and still are. That is OK. I have seen other examples where the minority was eventually proven right by a formal NFHS ruling.

Another regular contributor here said then, "Just another example of a rule that needs clarifying." Truer words were never spoken.

The NFHS has been raising the issue of officiating consistency. Yet this play shows just how hard it is to accomplish. If the rules are going to be as murky as this...and we are left to argue amongst ourselves what is the proper rule to apply to a scenario that happens several times a game...then the Fed needs to quickly and easily address these conflicts in a clear, no-nonsense way.

Where in the rule book can I find that? I have the same POE that Nevada posted. If they meant for the count to stop under those circumstances it would certainly be in there under the 'when to stop the count.'

That is your interpretation. The rule says neither what you say it does, nor what I say it does. We both are interpreting and extrapolating -- based on many things that are not as clearly spelled out as I would like. If the NCAA can say it so clearly, why can't the Fed?

There is a reason I interpret it that way. It is because if the NF wanted it done YOUR way they would specifically say so. There are exceptions to some rules and they specifically say so. In this case they don't, so don't read into something that is not there.

It is not my way. It is the way I was taught. If you look at the many threads, you will see there are many who profer this interpretation -- and many who do not.

As for reading somthing that is not there...let's not get into that. I explained clearly my reasoning, backed up by rule. To be closely guarded, a player must be continuosly guarded. That is the entire question here. You claim they remain guarded when a screener comes in between. I disagree...and cite the definition of guarding as the ratonale.

I am not so cocky as to say what the Fed wanted...when the Fed has not been so clear.