Here's the key part of that paragraph:

<i>In cases of screens outside the visual field, the opponent may make inadvertent contact with the screener and if the opponent is running rapidly, the contact may be severe. Such a case is to be ruled as incidental contact provided the opponent stops or attempts to stop on contact and moves around the screen, and provided the screener is not displaced if he/she has the ball.</i>

I watched the game, and it was one heckuva screen. However, I had no foul on the play. The screen was outside the OU player's field of vision. Did he attempt to stop on contact? That's a judgement call, but I didn't see anything to indicate otherwise. I believe it was a good "no call."

On this play, I have a foul on Price. He literally ran into and over Fife.

Rethinking....
 

As to the no-foul on Price.... Reading that paragraph would suggest a no-call. Price clearly made no attempt to go through Fife. Yeah, the contact was so sever it sent Fife backwards several feet and put him on his backside. I'm not sure the screen was so out of Price's vision, but he certainly wasn't looking.

One thing about that paragraph that has never made sense to me -- in what kind of play does the player with the ball become the screener?

<b>One thing about that paragraph that has never made sense to me -- in what kind of play does the player with the ball become the screener?</b>

I was just discussing that with another official this morning. The best we came up with would be a post player gets the ball at the top of the key and then screens for the guard as he cuts to the basket. Not sure if I've ever seen it, but I reckon it's possible!

Re: Rethinking....
 

Richard,
Picture a high post player with the ball pivoting and picking off the defender of a cutting teammate.
mick

Re: Re: Rethinking....
 

This was brought up in the Women's video this year. They want a foul on the screener( with the ball) IF it is illegal.

I was the one who originally brought up this situation. I have looked at it again (BTW it was White not Price, my fault).
I personnaly would not call a foul at that level (NCAA). However if I was doing anything below high school, I would probably call a foul on White. Just because with those younger age groups, you may try to protect them more.

A couple of years when I was coaching (should I admit that?)
my player was given a foul on a similar play, only problem he was setting the screen. I did not like the call. I think the ref called the foul on the screener because the player who was screened received the worst of the contact.

Jay

I'm with dlref on this one. The exact same play happened in one of the women's games last weekend (I've only been through the tapes once, can't remember at the moment wno it was) and in the replay it was clear that the defender did not see the screen. But in the play cited above, I thought the defender did push or "run through." I'd have called it. But them I'm only up to JV...

Re: Re: Rethinking....
 

You see this quite often in NBA games.

It's kind of strange, but I think very often the player who commits the foul gets the worst of the contact. The worst injury I've ever personally witnessed was during a community college game. A1 is closely guarded by B1. A1 fakes a 3-point attempt. B1 jumps high in the air and toward A1 (who never left the floor). B1 comes down on top of A1, flips upside down and lands on his shoulder, bending his outstretched arm the wrong way. B1 hyperextended his elbow and dislocated his shoulder. It was ugly, and obviously painful. And while the kid's lying there with the trainer, I have to go to the table and report the foul on him. Not a good night.

Chuck

I personally take offense to JRutledge saying that Packer "sure knows his X's and O's" He is a complete moron who is constantly second guessing coaching decisions probably even more than he does the officials. He is a wanna-be. How many time throughout the championship game did he criticize Maryland's gameplan? How many times did you hear him say in the semifinals that "the sooners need to pressure Indiana fullcourt" If he is such a wizard, why not put him in the coaching box? Oh that's right his teams would never get televised because they would suck so bad. The guy is out of touch.

I agree with ericdenn. I have a feeling coaches must sit around and laugh about some of the things Packer comes up with. At least with Bill Raftery and Dick Vitale, they can come across as a little wacky, but their remarks are not as condescending.

Can you spell Facetious? :(

condescend: to assume an air of superiority

When Vitale gives advice to coaches on national television, I think that would feel condescending to me if I was someone like Mike Davis. I don\'t even remember the specifics, but Vitale kept talking in interviews about advice he had given Davis when they were 7-5 and implied that he was in part responsible for their great run. I have also heard him talk about giving advice to other great coaches like Calvin Sampson and Roy Williams.

Sooner press
 

Actually, I do agree that the Sooners should have pressed a bit. They didn\'t even try it until the very end. If they had better speed, why not? And with the IU point playing on a weak ankle, why not make him work? The announcers indicated that a press might free up the big guy at the offensive end, but give it a try to see they can hit \'em.

I enjoyed the game, even if my alma mater lost.