Block / Charge Situation

[rwest]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Correct.

Incorrect. Pretty basic and you'll be the only one arguing that point. All players are entitled to their spot on the floor, even if it is horizontal.

Nope...nothing at all....unless he actually travels.

By what rule?

Incorrect again. LGP is not relevant.

Actually, he can in this case.

It's called tough luck for A1.

A1 doesn't have any right to land on B1....it's a no call....nothing...ever....not even a judgement call. By rule, there is no call to be considered.

They are not entitled to a spot on the floor laying horizontal. No way!
So then I can set a screen as wide as I want to since there is no restriction on how much space I take up? It's not tough luck for A1. Its a foul on B1. A1 has a right to a landing. B1 can't take that away from them.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by rwest

They are not entitled to a spot on the floor laying horizontal. No way!
So then I can set a screen as wide as I want to since there is no restriction on how much space I take up? It's not tough luck for A1. Its a foul on B1. A1 has a right to a landing. B1 can't take that away from them.

As long as B1 was in place prior to A1 taking off, A1 does not have the right to jump on top of B1.

[Adam]

A question:
When LGP does not apply, aren't screening principals used?

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by rwest

They are not entitled to a spot on the floor laying horizontal. No way!
So then I can set a screen as wide as I want to since there is no restriction on how much space I take up? It's not tough luck for A1. Its a foul on B1. A1 has a right to a landing. B1 can't take that away from them.

In this case, you are unequivocally and completely wrong. B1 is entitled to any spot on the floor...note ANY...as long as they got to that spot legally. Period. Once they are there, they can remain there as long as they like (except for 3 seconds in the lane).

B1 can take any position he/she wants as long as their arms/legs are not extended away from their torso. B1 may have to satisfy time/distance requirements (if they fall to the floor right in front of a moving opponent who doesn't have the ball) but the position itself is not illegal.

[rwest]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

In this case, you are unequivocally and completely wrong. B1 is entitled to any spot on the floor...note ANY...as long as they got to that spot legally. Period. Once they are there, they can remain there as long as they like (except for 3 seconds in the lane).

B1 can take any position he/she wants as long as their arms/legs are not extended away from their torso. B1 may have to satisfy time/distance requirements (if they fall to the floor right in front of a moving opponent who doesn't have the ball) but the position itself is not illegal.

I'll agree with you in that out in the open floor this is probably not going to be a block. But my example is dealing with rebounding action around the basket. When A1 goes up for a rebound they are entitled to a landing spot. If they land on B1's unmoving leg and fall to the ground, you have to have a block because A1 is entitled to his spot on the floor too. He has the right to verticality. B1's spot can't occupy A1's spot, which in my example it did.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by rwest

I'll agree with you in that out in the open floor this is probably not going to be a block. But my example is dealing with rebounding action around the basket. When A1 goes up for a rebound they are entitled to a landing spot. If they land on B1's unmoving leg and fall to the ground, you have to have a block because A1 is entitled to his spot on the floor too. He has the right to verticality. B1's spot can't occupy A1's spot, which in my example it did.

Please read the case play Billy posted above. It's still relevant even though it's not in the book, as it's never been reversed by NFHS.

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by rwest

I'll agree with you in that out in the open floor this is probably not going to be a block. But my example is dealing with rebounding action around the basket. When A1 goes up for a rebound they are entitled to a landing spot. If they land on B1's unmoving leg and fall to the ground, you have to have a block because A1 is entitled to his spot on the floor too. He has the right to verticality. B1's spot can't occupy A1's spot, which in my example it did.

Woohoo! I get to come back in to the play room. I see I missed all the fun last night.

This particular point addresses an airborne player. In your example, if B1's unmoving leg was there prior to A1 leaving the floor to rebound, then no, it's not a foul on B1. A1 is not entitled to a landing spot that was previously occupied.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by jdw3018

Woohoo! I get to come back in to the play room. I see I missed all the fun last night.

This particular point addresses an airborne player. In your example, if B1's unmoving leg was there prior to A1 leaving the floor to rebound, then no, it's not a foul on B1. A1 is not entitled to a landing spot that was previously occupied.

You mean he's not fair game to jump on once he falls to the floor? I'm shocked! Shocked, I tell ya!

[rwest]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

You mean he's not fair game to jump on once he falls to the floor? I'm shocked! Shocked, I tell ya!

I never said he was! Every player has a right to a spot on the floor including A1 who is going up for a rebound.

And you still haven't answered my question regarding a player setting a screen with his feet outside his shoulders? Is that a legal screen if contact occurs? Or did I miss your answer in all of the posts we've been making.

Also, please site the rule that says LGP is only relevant on a moving player.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by rwest

I never said he was! Every player has a right to a spot on the floor including A1 who is going up for a rebound.

Sure you did. You said if B1 is lying on the floor, A1 may then jump and land on him and at the same time draw a foul. I say if B1 is there first, A1 is responsible for the contact.

Originally Posted by rwest

And you still haven't answered my question regarding a player setting a screen with his feet outside his shoulders? Is that a legal screen if contact occurs? Or did I miss your answer in all of the posts we've been making.

Nope, not legal, and it's covered under the screening rules. It has nothing to do with LGP.

Originally Posted by rwest

Also, please site the rule that says LGP is only relevant on a moving player.

Already did, 4-23-3 describes how LGP is relevant by describing the additional rights it confers on the one who has LGP.

Furthermore, jdw3018 lays it out well just above.