2007-08 Case Book 10.6.1 Situation A:

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Maybe...depends on whether A1 has the ball or not.

If A1 has the ball, then yes, it is a charge if B1 has position before A1 becomes airborne.....no landing space required.

If A1 doesn't have the ball, B1 must give time and distance. If B1 got the spot just before A1's last foot left the floor or even as A1 was taking their final step, it will still be a block....not enough time/distance.

The only dilemma that remains is when (a) A1 catches the ball while in the air or, (b) having started with the ball, passes the ball while in the air.

In (b), B's LGP, if obtained before A1 jumped, doesn't cease to be LGP just because the ball is passed away.

In (a), it is a bit stickier question. At the time B obtained a position on A1 without the ball, it was not LGP....too late. But when airborne A1 catches the ball, does that make B1's position legal? This point has been discussed and debated here in the past and you'll not find 100% agreement on the topic. That said, it is my opinion that B1's position that was obtained just before A1 became airborne becomes legal when A1 catches the ball. Rationale...A1 had the ball at the point of contact and B1 had position before A1 jumped.

Camron, you have this a bit twisted.
In order to keep it simple all that one needs to remember is that the guard must have obtained legal position BEFORE the opponent left the floor if the opponent is airborne. This is true whether the opponent has the ball or not.

The time and distance factor (two strides) only applies to guarding a nonairborne, moving opponent who does NOT have the ball.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Camron, you have this a bit twisted.
In order to keep it simple all that one needs to remember is that the guard must have obtained legal position BEFORE the opponent left the floor if the opponent is airborne. This is true whether the opponent has the ball or not.

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

The time and distance factor (two strides) only applies to guarding a nonairborne, moving opponent who does NOT have the ball.

Actually, I don't have it twisted at all. And it is not so simple as you seem to think.

The question is about what position is legal...and when does it become legal. We have two orthogonal rules (control/time/distance vs. airborne player) that interfer with each other in ruling on the play.


When A1 never has the ball, the answer is clear, time and distance are always required...B1 must give 1-2 steps and just before A1 jumps is not good enough.

When A1 had the ball prior to the jump, the answer is also clear, time and distance are not required and gaining position just before the jump is sufficient.

In the case referenced, B1's position is NOT legal at the time it is obtained (time and distance were not given) but becomes legal when airborne A1 catches the ball (erasing the need for time/distance). And that is the key point of the discussion...that a position that, as obtained, is not legal becomes legal through other actions (A1 catching the ball).

Now, does the legality of B1's position depend on airborne A1's possession of the ball at at the time of the contact, the time of the jump, or if there was possession at some time at or after B1 obtained their position? At a minimum the case play supports the time of contact and, I assert, implies that possession of the ball for any amount of time after the position is obtained is sufficient to negate the need for time/distance. This is necessary for a player who jumps with the ball but passes it away before contacting the B1. B1's position, once legal, can't become illegal because A1 passes the ball.