The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Fri Jul 25, 2008, 06:25pm
Adam's Avatar
Keeper of the HAMMER
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: MST
Posts: 27,190
1. Why is it a violation for the screener to be out of bounds with one foot? He's legally allowed to be there.

2. If he's stationary, why is it a foul on B3? He's allowed his spot on the floor, and if he's not moving, he should be fine.
__________________
Sprinkles are for winners.
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Fri Jul 25, 2008, 08:20pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 18
Send a message via AIM to capwsu
Situation 2 (screener with one foot OOB)

In my opinion, although B3 can legally step OOB following a made basket, once he sets a screen it seems to me like he is not in a position to set a legal screen. Similar to a defensive player trying to take a charge with a foot OOB (and yes I understand the difference that B3 can legally step OOB). I would interpret the play (if B gains a definite advantage or someone goes to the floor) that B3 cannot set a legal screen with a foot OOB.

If anyone here can discredit my interpretation I will be willing to hear it. It is a very interesting scenario I have not thought of before. It would reallly help to see it (from the stands at a camp and be able to listen to the evaluator's thoughts )
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Fri Jul 25, 2008, 08:28pm
Adam's Avatar
Keeper of the HAMMER
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: MST
Posts: 27,190
Stepping out of bounds prevents a defender from establishing or maintaining Legal Guarding Position (LGP). LGP only gives a player who is moving the potential to take a charge. LGP is not required for a player who is not moving. If B3 gets to that spot first, he is entitled to keep it without being run over by A4.

edited to add: The screening rule (4-40) says nothing about keeping both feet inbounds.
__________________
Sprinkles are for winners.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Sat Jul 26, 2008, 01:44am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Antonio, Texas
Posts: 1,342
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snaqwells
Stepping out of bounds prevents a defender from establishing or maintaining Legal Guarding Position (LGP). LGP only gives a player who is moving the potential to take a charge. LGP is not required for a player who is not moving. If B3 gets to that spot first, he is entitled to keep it without being run over by A4.

edited to add: The screening rule (4-40) says nothing about keeping both feet inbounds.
Snaqwell, you remember the play Kentucky ran to attempt to get a foul called at the end of the game this year in the NCAA's. This play appears to be similar.
__________________
truerookie
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Sat Jul 26, 2008, 05:06am
In Memoriam
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Hell
Posts: 20,211
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snaqwells
edited to add: The screening rule (4-40) says nothing about keeping both feet inbounds.
From the 2004-05 rule book POE's, when they clarified the rules philosophy....

PLAYERS ON THE COURT "Last year's emphasis ensured that defensive players obtain legal guarding position while on the playing court and not while out of bounds. The same principle is in place for ALL players. Too often, players are leaving the court for unauthorized reasons. An all-too-common example is is an offensive player getting around a screen or defensive player by running out of bounds. That is not legal and gives a tremendous advantage to the offense. Officials must enforce the rules that are already in place. It is a technical foul. Coaches benefit the game by teaching players to play on the court."

That gives you both the rules philosophy and the penalty. All players are supposed to stay in-bounds. If any player...either on offense or defense...gains an advantage by going out of bounds, it was a technical foul in 2004-05. That penalty for that rule was changed in 2005-06 from a technical foul to a violation(R9-3-3). Therefore, if a player sets a screen while standing OOB, and that screen serves it's purpose by making an opponent stop or go around it, the screener has gained an illegal advantage not meant by rule and must be penalized. Call a violation on the screener.
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Sat Jul 26, 2008, 09:26am
Lighten up, Francis.
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,686
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee
That gives you both the rules philosophy and the penalty. All players are supposed to stay in-bounds.
Except, of course, for players who are allowed to be out of bounds; like say, for example, a teammate of the inbounder. . . ?
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Sat Jul 26, 2008, 11:01am
Adam's Avatar
Keeper of the HAMMER
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: MST
Posts: 27,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scrapper1
Except, of course, for players who are allowed to be out of bounds; like say, for example, a teammate of the inbounder. . . ?
Exactly, this player is allowed to go out of bounds. Therefore, it stands to reason he's allowed to be partly out of bounds. You can't call a violation on this player just because he stops half-way and happens, while standing still, to get in the way of a defender.
__________________
Sprinkles are for winners.
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Sat Jul 26, 2008, 12:17pm
In Memoriam
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Hell
Posts: 20,211
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snaqwells
Exactly, this player is allowed to go out of bounds. Therefore, it stands to reason he's allowed to be partly out of bounds. You can't call a violation on this player just because he stops half-way and happens, while standing still, to get in the way of a defender.
Apples and freaking oranges.

On an unrestricted throw-in, teammates of the thrower are allowed to go OOB on the same endline as part of the throw-in only. If we follow your line of reasoning, it would not be a violation for a player to set a screen with one foot OOB on that endline, but it would be a a violation if the same player set the exact same screen on a sideline or the other endline instead. And on a spot throw-in, it would be a violation for a teammate to set a screen with a foot OOB on any boundary line. Somehow, I really don't think that the purpose and intent of the rule was to legalize one instance only out of eight possible throw-in situations.

Rule 9-3-3 doesn't differentiate between being partially OOB or completely OOB. It simply states that it's a violation to leave the floor for an unauthorized reason. If an illegal advantage was gained, it is an unauthorized reason. And we know from the play where a defender can't have a LGP with one foot on a boundary line that the FED considers a player to be simply OOB. Nowayinhell did the rulesmakers ever intend setting screens OOB to be an authorized reason for that player to go OOB. The POE cited above tells us that.

Last edited by Jurassic Referee; Sat Jul 26, 2008 at 12:21pm.
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jul 29, 2008, 12:50am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: In the offseason.
Posts: 12,263
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snaqwells
1. Why is it a violation for the screener to be out of bounds with one foot? He's legally allowed to be there.

2. If he's stationary, why is it a foul on B3? He's allowed his spot on the floor, and if he's not moving, he should be fine.
#1...It's not. Any offensive player may be OOB on the throwin boundary following a made basket. There are no restrictions on why they are there...none.
#2. It isn't. The restrictions on being OOB are only for LGP...and screening doesn't involve LGP since LGP is a defensive requirement.

For all we know (and we're not mind readers), that player may be thinking they're OOB expecting to receive the ball from the teammate to complete the throwin or may think they're inbound sexpecting to receive the throwin pass. Unless someone can read their mind, you can't claim you know the reason they're OOB so they are there for an autorized reason.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com
Commissioner, Portland Basketball Officials Association
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jul 29, 2008, 02:29am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Antonio, Texas
Posts: 1,342
[QUOTE=Camron Rust

sexpecting (nice word; could i use this in a game of scrabble?).
__________________
truerookie
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
OPI on the screen pass in the S.Bowl? ChickenOfNC Football 4 Wed Feb 08, 2006 09:17am
Legal Screen Pass Grey Hare Football 14 Mon Nov 14, 2005 02:02pm
Inbounds pass Cyber-Ref Basketball 8 Tue Nov 30, 2004 11:57pm
Question about an inbounds pass BBallinRick Basketball 14 Sat Jul 12, 2003 05:45am
ruling on an inbounds pass??? jasonboom Basketball 4 Fri Feb 04, 2000 01:00am


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:27pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1