Block / Charge Situation

[OHBBREF]

Originally Posted by jdw3018

I don't disagree that B1 forfeits his LGP. In fact, that's what I said in my first post on this topic.

But what if LGP isn't required?

even if you go with the part about the defender is entitled to his position on the court, since the foot is OB there is no way that you can not call this a block.
the player has to be on the floor to be legal - not just to have legal gaurding position.

[PAULK1]

This is from the 04-05 interps from NFHS ( I believe this was the year they changed the rule)
SITUATION 13: A1 is dribbling near the sideline when B1 obtains legal guarding position. B1 stays in the path of A1 but in doing so has (a) one foot touching the sideline or (b) one foot in the air over the out-of-bounds area when A1 contacts B1 in the torso. RULING: In (a), B1 is called for a blocking foul because a player may not be out of bounds and obtain or maintain legal guarding position. In (b), A1 is called for a player-control foul because B2 had obtained and maintained legal guarding position. (4-23-2; 4-23-3a)

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by OHBBREF

even if you go with the part about the defender is entitled to his position on the court, since the foot is OB there is no way that you can not call this a block.
the player has to be on the floor to be legal - not just to have legal guarding position.

Disagree. A defender who is OOB doesn't automatically become open for free hits just because they're OOB.

The rule that addresses this is ONLY about LGP. It declares that and OOB player can't have LGP. Thus, any contact that depends on LGP will automatically be a block if the defender is OOB. However, contact that doesn't depend on LGP is unaffected by this rule. All case plays and interpretations dealing with this situation are in the context of a player actively guarding their oppoenent...making LGP relevant.

Additionally, it deals only with block/charge. Any other type of foul (illegal use of hands, push, hold and hand check) against the offensive player are still possible even if the defender is actively guarding the dribbler.

EDIT: ran spell checker after seeing I had so many typos. :|

[Adam]

I agree with Camron. If B1 isn't moving, he doesn't need LGP. 4.23.3 deals specifically with a player moving and maintaining LGP. It doesn't apply to a stationary defender.

[truerookie]

Why did B1 set up so close to the baseline that would cause him to be OOB?

The baselines and sidelines are your friend. You can easily establish your position so that you are not consider OOB thus losing your status of LGP.

Block!!

[Adam]

Originally Posted by truerookie

Why did B1 set up so close to the baseline that would cause him to be OOB?

The baselines and sidelines are your friend. You can easily establish your position so that you are not consider OOB thus losing your status of LGP.

Block!!

Block against a stationary defender?

Until the fed specifically says we should call this play a block, I've got PC.

[OHBBREF]

Rule 10 Fouls and Penalties
Section 6 Contact ART. 2 . . . A dribbler shall not charge into nor contact an opponent in his/her path nor attempt to dribble between two opponents or between an opponent and a boundary, unless the space is such as to provide a reasonable chance for him or her to go through without contact. If a dribbler, without contact, sufficiently passes an opponent to have head and shoulders in advance of that opponent, the greater responsibility for subsequent contact is on the opponent. If a dribbler in his/her progress is moving in a straight-line path, he/she may not be crowded out of that path, but if an opponent is able to legally obtain a defensive position in that path, the dribbler must avoid contact by changing direction or ending his/her dribble.

That is the FED from last year I think but I am stuck on the term legally obtain a defensive position. you can not be legal if your foot is on the line. So unless the dribbler put his head down and go out his jousting lance and ran this defender over, the call has to be a block becuase the defender is not legal.
The NCAA wording is virtually identical.

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by OHBBREF

That is the FED from last year I think but I am stuck on the term legally obtain a defensive position. you can not be legal if your foot is on the line. So unless the dribbler put his head down and go out his jousting lance and ran this defender over, the call has to be a block becuase the defender is not legal.

LGP has to do with being able to get to a spot in the path of an offensive player, not a defender who happens to be in the path the offensive player wants to take. See the difference? In the OP, if the defender is facing the ball handler, then tries to step in front of the moving ball handler and gets to the spot first with both feet inbounds, it's a charge. If the defender contacts the ball handler before getting to the spot first, it's a block, because they didn't maintain LGP. If the defender gets to the spot first, but has one foot OOB, it's a block, also because there is no LGP.

But let's say the defender and ball handler are both standing there staring at each other, then the ball handler decides to run through the defender who is just standing there. Obvious charge. Turn the defender around so their back is to the ball handler, and they are just standing there; now the ball handler takes off and runs through the back of the defender. Another obvious charge, even though the defender does not have LGP, by definition. The defender is entitled to the spot on the floor, and they did not move into the path of the offensive player. This time the defender is standing with one foot OOB before the ball handler takes off - still a charge, again not because of LGP, but because they did not move into the path of the offensive player, and they're entitled to a spot on the floor.