The other guys beat me to this question.

This one is WAY too easy - A1 is OOB for a throw-in, reaches through the plane before releasing the throw-in, and B1 contacts the arm, knocking the ball away.

A1 is OOB, and does not have LGP. B1 initiates contact. By your reasoning, this is either a no-call, or a foul on A1 because they're OOB. :eek:

That is my whole point - LGP is the main point of this discussion. I keep bringing it up because that is the reason for the blocking foul. Both you and rwest state the only reason for the foul is because the defender is OOB. There is an important distinction between LGP, and "player location".

Please, look at the case play again, and quote for me the reason B1 is called for a blocking foul in both the case play.

I've said what rule it is. It is the definition of Player Location. Seriously, I've said it in just about every post. I do not have a HS rule book with me at work. However the NCAA rules would be the following:

Rule 4 Sec. 9 Defines Blocking- Illegal personal contact that impedes the progress of an opponent
Rule 4 Sec. 35 Art 3 Defines Guarding (and is the basis for your argument of the player being entitled to the spot) - Every player shall be entitled to a spot on the playing court, provided that such player gets there first without legally contacting an opponent
Rule 4 Sec. 35 Art 1 Defines Guarding - Guarding shall be the act of legally placing the body in the path of an offensive opponent. The guarding position shall be initially established and then maintained on the playing court.
Rule 4 Sec. 46 Art 1 Defines Location of a Player - The location of a player (or non-player) is determined as being:
a. Where he or she is touching the floor, as far as being inbounds or out of bounds
b. In the front court or back court
c. Outside the three point line...
Rule 4 Sec. 52 Defines Playing Court - The playing court is the area on the floor that lies within the geometrical lines formed by the inside edge of the boundary lines.

Therefore, in the OP, the player's location is considered to be OOB, BY RULE (4-46-1a)
If the players position is OOB, then the player is not entitled to the spot on the Playing Court, BY RULE (4-52 and 4-35-3)
If the player is not legally within the path of the offense then it is a blocking foul on the defender, BY RULE (4-9)

I've stated what I would call and why and have a sound principle behind it. I've also stated what it would take for me to call a foul against the offense. :D

No, LGP is the main point of rwest's argument, NOT MINE. I'm not using it b/c it is not relevent to this play. The player's location is and that is what my whole basis for calling a block is, as indicated by my previous post.

Now will either you or jdw please provide a rule reference to call the player control foul like I have provided? Thanks. ;)

****EDITED TO ADD THE FOLLOWING THIS IS NOT WHAT I BELIEVE BUT...****In fact, if you read it this way (I DON'T), BY rule in order for the player to be entitled to a spot, then he has to be considered guarding somebody since that is where it falls in the rule book! If a player is guarding someone, then they have to have LGP. LGP can't be established or maintained if the player is OOB. That could be an argument for rwest's point of view on this as well.****EDITED TO ADD THE PREVIOUSTHAT IS NOT WHAT I BELIEVE BUT...****

except we are talking about defensive players being out of bounds and making things BLACK and WHITE again.

But we do agree that because A1 is out of bounds he DOES NOT have legal guarding position right?

10-6-7...A dribbler shall neither charge into nor contact an opponent in his/her path...

How's that?

Everyone who has posted in this thread agrees with that.

This has never been in question, by anyone, in this entire thread.

That's the whole problem - it is <B>entirely</B> relevent to this play. So, if you do not have your books handy, maybe you should refrain from commenting until you have them in front of you? Again, case play 4.23.3 Sit B is the relevent play.

Sure - 4-19-6

We will have to agree to disagree. I've made my argument and will stick by it. Maybe MTD can email Mary and get the question resolved:D

If you are using LGP, then this play is a BLOCK based on the case play and we don't need to argue!!!:confused:

Correct, I don't believe anyone has disputed that at all.

(I hope) the whole crux of this discussion is whether a stationary player can draw a charge while having a foot on the line.

First off, (I hope) we all agree a player can commit a player-control foul against a defensive player who does not have LGP, correct?

We've all said that if LGP is required on this play, it's a block. This player does not have LGP, but he does not need LGP if he is not moving.

We all agree the OP's play is a foul, if the defender was moving to obtain or maintain LGP.

The question arose as to whether a stationary defender, can still draw the charge, even if they have a foot on the line (OOB status).

Not including this particular play, I believe we can all agree that, in certain situations, a player can be called for a player-control foul against a defender that does not have LGP, correct?

yep
A1 driving to the basket B1 is running parralell to A1 haveing never establish LGP, A1 changes direction toward B1 and lowers shoulder to initiate contact and go through B1 to get to the basket.

PC foul and we go the other way.