A friend & I have a disagreement about a PC foul when the defense is under the basket. I told him NFHS is different than NC2A or NBA.
I say it doesn't matter were the defense is as long as he/she has established a "legal" guarding position.

NFHS case book, pg30, 4.23.2: B1 jumps in front of dribbler A1 & obtains a legal guarding position with both feet touching & facing A1. Dribbler A1 contacts B1's torso. Ruling: PC on A1.
My friend says, "If B1 is under the basket there is no PC."
Of course, I know he is wrong but, this is only text I can find that would support my position.

Am I overlooking an area that would provide a better situation? Thanx

That's the only text you need. It's there, clear as day, in black and white.By rule, this is a PC foul. Whether an official chooses to call it that way or not, is up to him/her.

Let me guess. Your friend either is a howler monkey, or else he thinks Doug Collins is a great analyst.

Or both.

Yes. 10.6.1D

NCAA Men's is the same as NFHS and you are correct about having a legal guarding position anywhere on the court. NCAA Women's used to be the same as NCAA Men's, but Barb Jacobs (Rules Editor, NCAA Women's) made a very stupid interpretation without knowing what the rule book and casebook said about the matter (what do you expect from someone who never officiated a basketball game in her life). And know I am getting into a Dennis Miller rant, so I will end this posting.

You forgot to end the rant as Dennis does: "That's just my opinion. I could be wrong." ;)

Rarely is Dennis wrong.

Your self-restraint in not adding, "...and rarely am I wrong" is quite admirable. I will add it for you (taking your word for it about Dennis Miller):

Rarely is Dennis wrong, and very, very rarely is MTDenucci Sr wrong!!!

I thought I made a mistake once, but I was mistaken about making the mistake.

Maybe, just maybe Barb Jacobs made a very informed decision based on what is good for the game. Now, I don't know Ms. Jacobs, but that interpretation is consistent with the way the game gets called at the higher levels.

I know this powder keg has been set off once already, but I doubt that the interpretation was made without any investigation or forethought.

[Edited by stripes on Mar 13th, 2002 at 12:48 PM]

Hey Stripes,
I only do high school but am curious for my own knowledge, what was Ms. Jacob's interpetation?

Bottom line: Do what your supervisor wants you to do, not what <I>you</I> think is right.

The NCAA Women's ruling is that a player who is a secondary defender (help defense) may not take a "charge" directly under the basket UNLESS the offensive player is dribbling parallel to the baseline...a couple things to understand: 1)this ruling DOES NOT apply to the primary defender - in other words, if B3 picks up defense on A2 at the head of the key, establishes legal guarding position, is moving legally, etc., and gets plowed by A2 under the basket - that would be a PC foul...2)the parallel to the baseline provision is because the offensive player could be dribbling across the key for a reverse lay-in...3)the purpose is to stop weak-side or help defenders from stepping in late under the basket in hopes of drawing a PC foul...it eliminates some rough play and eliminates what many people - obviously not Mr. DeNucci - consider to be bad defense...hope this helps...

[Edited by rockyroad on Mar 13th, 2002 at 01:26 PM]

We hashed this GPS to death a couple of months ago, so all I have to say is,
AAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHH! !!!!
:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D

Seeing it in detail like this makes a big difference to me, as I sit here in the basement trying to concoct an opinion of someone I've never met in a situation I've never before thought about. She didn't just say, "No PC under the basket. Period." Hmmm, perhaps her interp deserves a little more consideration. I may end up disagreeing with her after that consideration, but I'm guessing she didn't go off half-cocked as I had been assuming.

Drake M:

Actually these various detailed situations were not what we hashed to death a couple of months ago. As described by rockyroad above, this is a very different ruling from what I had been assuming Eli Roe, crew, and stripes were talking about. This is not just any old defender under the basket at any old time, as in the NBA. I may still disagree with Barb Jacobs in the end, but it's good to see that she's not as far out to lunch as has been implied.