Moving Screen - Violation?

[wyo96]

G9th - 2 man crew: Last night late in the 4th in a 12 point game my partner called a moving screen as a 'violation'. We talked about it after the game and I asked him about it. I was 99.9% sure there is no such thing, and if there is contact during a screen, then "time and distance" apply and it may be a foul, but no violation.

He said he remembered being taught there was such a thing as a violation years ago. (15-20 years ago) Generally this guy is very by the book and good official, so this threw me for a loop.

Do any of you who have been in the business awhile remember if a violation ever was a option?

Also, please help me remove my .1% doubt about it not existing today.

Thanks.

[Adam]

You are correct, there is no violation for this. It's either a foul or nothing.

[Mark Dexter]

Foul or nothing is right.

To follow up, I'd just like to add that in order to have the foul, the screener must contact an opponent.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by wyo96

G9th - 2 man crew: Last night late in the 4th in a 12 point game my partner called a moving screen as a 'violation'.

He said he remembered being taught there was such a thing as a violation years ago. (15-20 years ago) Generally this guy is very by the book and good official, so this threw me for a loop.

Do any of you who have been in the business awhile remember if a violation ever was a option?

A moving screen without contact has never been a violation, going back almost 50 years.

[JugglingReferee]

Hmm... I dunno.

After Aunt Edna's chili last night, I think I had a moving violation of some kind.

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by Mark Dexter

To follow up, I'd just like to add that in order to have the foul, the screener must contact an opponent.

I had a very strange conversation with a well-respected, long-time girls HS coach last Thursday night about this. During a TO in the first half, she asked me about a moving screen the opponent was setting right in front of me.

I simply said, "She was moving, but there wasn't any contact, coach."

"But, she was moving."

"Yes, but there has to be contact to be a foul."

"But it was a moving screen."

This is where I realized she didn't know the rule. I was actually quite surprised, as she is known as a "rules" coach who doesn't get on officials for stupid things and if she does have a question is usually very well versed in the rule.

So, I simply said, "Coach, there has to be contact to be a foul. If there had been contact with your girl, then that may have been an illegal screen. But until there's contact it's just two people moving in space."

She looked confused but moved on with her timeout. I really was surprised that she didn't know.

[grunewar]

How many generations of coaches are we going to have to go through before this myth finally runs its course?

Heck Mark might not even be with us any more by then!?!?!?!?

[wyo96]

Thanks everyone, it confirms what I thought.

wyo96

[BillyMac]

A moving screen is not in and of itself a foul, contact must occur for a foul to be called. If a blind screen is set on a stationary defender, the defender must be given one normal step to change direction and attempt to avoid contact. If a screen is set on a moving defender, the defender gets a minimum of one step and a maximum of two steps, depending on the speed and distance of the defender.

[Mark Dexter]

Originally Posted by jdw3018

I had a very strange conversation with a well-respected, long-time girls HS coach last Thursday night about this. During a TO in the first half, she asked me about a moving screen the opponent was setting right in front of me.

Only the first time you've heard a coach plead for a "moving screen" without contact?

I have that discussion at least once per season.

[fullor30]

Originally Posted by wyo96

G9th - 2 man crew: Last night late in the 4th in a 12 point game my partner called a moving screen as a 'violation'. We talked about it after the game and I asked him about it. I was 99.9% sure there is no such thing, and if there is contact during a screen, then "time and distance" apply and it may be a foul, but no violation.

He said he remembered being taught there was such a thing as a violation years ago. (15-20 years ago) Generally this guy is very by the book and good official, so this threw me for a loop.

Do any of you who have been in the business awhile remember if a violation ever was a option?

Also, please help me remove my .1% doubt about it not existing today.

Thanks.

Reminds of a partner I had years ago, boys soph game and she was in her first year. Would go to the table to report a travel "Blue, 23, travel. white ball." God bless her little heart.

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by fullor30

Reminds of a partner I had years ago, boys soph game and she was in her first year. Would go to the table to report a travel "Blue, 23, travel. white ball." God bless her little heart.

OMG too funny!

Did she come to a stop in the Violation Reporting Area?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by JugglingReferee

Did she come to a stop in the Violation Reporting Area?

Sometimes ya gotta do what ya gotta do.......

I've seen year-end playdowns where evaluators have to decide who is going to go on and do the semi's and championship game. Usually, most of the officials by the time they get to this stage are fairly even--competent, experienced and well-qualified. It might be getting tough to justify picking one official over another who is just as equally qualified. Sooooo....the easiest way out is to pick an official who's book mechanics might be just a tetch better than another official. That might include something as inconsequential as failing to stop when reporting a foul. Is it right? Naw, but it's something you can put down on an evaluation sheet. And I have seen some amazingly petty things put down on evals.

Sometimes, like a comedian or a politician (if you can tell them apart), you have to know your audience.

Jmho.