High school rules to come to the same conclusion for the OP, BLOCK!

Rule 4-23-1 Defines Guarding: Guarding is the acti of legally placing the body in the path of an offensive opponent.
Rule 4-23-2 Defines Initial LGP: To obtain an initial legal guarding position:
a. The guard must have both feet touching the playing court
b. The front of the guard's torso must be facing the opponent
Rule 4-35-1 Defines Player Location: The location of a player or nonplayer is determined by where the player is touching the floor as far as being:
a. Inbounds or out of bounds
Rule 4-9-1 and 2 Defines Inbounds/OOB: 1) Boundary lines of the court consist of end lines and sidelines. 2) The inside edges of these lines define the inbounds and out-of-bounds areas
Rule 4-7-1 Defines Blocking: Blocking is illegal personal contact which impedes the progress of an opponent with or without the ball
Rule 4-7-2a and b Defines Charging that we are talking about:
Charging is illegal personal contact caused by pushing or moving into an opponents torso.
a. A player who is moving witht he ball is required to stop or change direction to avoid contact if a defensive player has obtained a legal guarding position in his/her path.
b. If a guard has obtained a legal guarding position, the player with the ball must get his/her head and shoulders past the torso of the defensive player....

So, if you consider the defender in the OP to be "guarding," then that player has never established LGP b/c the player did not have both feet inbounds. If the player never established LGP, then the player is illegally in the path of the offense. If the defense is illegally in the path, then the defense is responsible for the contact.
You are arguing that the defender had LGP when by rule he didn't. Never established w/ both feet inbounds. If he did establish it at one point w/ both feet inbounds, then he had to have moved in order for a foot to end up OOB, in which case case play 4.23.3 B is the correct case which says that it is a BLOCK.

Definition of charge says that the player had to legally be in front of the defender. See previous posts, with rules included, as to why the defender in the OP is not legally w/in the path of the offense.

No, I'm not arguing the defender had LGP. I'm arguing LGP is not required. Your high school rule citation does not state a stationary defender has to gain and maintain LGP. At the very least, a player with inbounds status is entitled to his spot on the floor whether or not he has LGP. Do you deny this?

In order to be guarding you have to have LGP. That is why it is defined in the definition of guarding. It also states in that same rule (definition of guarding) what is required to obtain it.

What is "legally placing the body in the path" mean to you then? You are falling back to the spot on the floor argument which I have refuted with the definition of Player Location. The player is not on the floor legally.

This is just wrong. You're conflating the idea of guarding, as defined in 4-23-1 with the more specific "Legal Guarding Position" as defined in the rest of 4-23. You're also completely ignoring "Every player is entitled to a spot on the playing court provided such player gets there first without illegally contacting an opponent." This comes prior to even a mention of LGP for a reason; it's the primary rule for judging contact.

LGP grants a player the ability to be innocent of contact even if they don't get to a spot first. I've never seen or heard anyone claim a stationary defender has to have LGP.


Consider this play: A1 gets the ball, B1 is between him and the basket with one foot in the air, A1 runs by him and knocks him over before B1 gets his foot down to establish LGP. Both players fall down. What's your call?

No I'm not conflating guarding. As defined it says legally placing themselves in front of the ball handler. I take legally getting there to mean that they are also legal once they get there, so,if the player is STANDING OOB, then that player is not in a spot, wait for it, "on the playing court." In the example you gave, I've got a block. They are both moving and that requires that the defense gets both feet established for LGP. Since you said before he gets his second foot down, easy call. If he had established LGP by getting his foot down then he can move to maintain and whether or not both feet are on the ground is irrelevent, unless 1 foot is OOB!

I'm done with arguing my point. I'm not going to change your mind and you aren't going to change mine. We will have to agree to disagree. But I'm right!;)

Fair enough, but I'll say that just because B1 has his foot in the air does not mean he's moving. You are the only person I've ever seen or heard argue that a stationary defender requires LGP. I'm done as well, as it appears we can do nothing more at this point than point out Big Ben to the kids.

I did find this on-line. It is from the MHSAA (Michigan). Look at slides 59 and 60, which appear to be from an NFHS powerpoint that year. Not sure if it proves my point or yours, but I can't find anything else and I don't have my books from that year still.

http://www.mhsaa.com/games/sports/bbb/0304bbbweb.pdf

It has been a fun debate though.:)

A real world play. A1 has a breakaway layup. His momentum carries him past the basket and he has one foot on the baseline when he's unceremoniously run over by B1, who came from a different direction to attempt a shot block and whose momentum has also carried him beyond the basket.

Anybody NOT have a foul on B1 here, even though A1 clearly has a foot on the line?

My 2nd Worst Nightmare
 

Late last season, I was trail and my partner blew the whistle, first giving the offensive foul mechanic & then switching to a call on the defense. The worst nightmare would be ME doing it.

Well, it's not Big Ben, but it is in Europe. . .

http://www.geocities.com/danahillrem...d/vacation.jpg

It Was Easier Giving Up Problem Gambling ...
 

Please stop tempting me. Five weeks. Not a single image.

In time, you won't even see the images.
http://pro.corbis.com/images/CB01371...3BEA14FA21C%7D

I had this discussion in pregame over the weekend and this play was brought up
defender B3 is guarding A3 in the lane - as A1 drives to the basket A3 rolls down the lane line toward the low block B3 remains stationary and maintains his position in the lane sideways (hips and shoulders) toward A1, but having been sationary for several seconds prior to contact initiated by A1 as he drives toward basket?

B3 by rule never establishes "legal guarding position" as he never faced up to the offensive player, however B3 has had a stationary position for several seconds prior to any contatct and does nothing to inititate the contact, are you going to call this a block because of no LGP? :confused: