Just like that

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by deecee

I agree -- I am just talking about the defender playing on ball defense -- there is no mention of shoulder width -- as that would make playing defense impossible on ball.

You might want to double-check the Old One's post on last year's POE.

It doesn't make playing defense impossible. If the player can play better defense by standing on thier head, more power to them. They just have to be aware of the rules on guarding and who would be more responsible for contact if and when it occurs.

[deecee]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

You might want to double-check the Old One's post on last year's POE.

It doesn't make playing defense impossible. If the player can play better defense by standing on thier head, more power to them. They just have to be aware of the rules on guarding and who would be more responsible for contact if and when it occurs.

The old ones POE pertained to legal screen.

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by deecee

The old ones POE pertained to legal screen.

Right, but that same theory applies to guarding as well. I posted the rule on guarding, and the fact that the player cannot extend a leg into the path of the player. The POE just clarifies where "extending" starts (outside shoulder width).

Remember, it doesn't say the player cannot have their feet out there, just that they no longer are considered to have LGP and are thus more reponsible if contact occurs.

[CMHCoachNRef]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

Right, but that same theory applies to guarding as well. I posted the rule on guarding, and the fact that the player cannot extend a leg into the path of the player. The POE just clarifies where "extending" starts (outside shoulder width).

Remember, it doesn't say the player cannot have their feet out there, just that they no longer are considered to have LGP and are thus more reponsible if contact occurs.

M&M, if you show me a defender who plays with his feet shoulder width apart, I'd be willing to bet he carries a clip board, stat sheet and pencil during the game.

Defenders NEVER play with their feet shoulder width apart. If a player is in a good defensive stance (feet about six to twelve inches outside the shoulders), has both feet FLAT ON THE FLOOR, is setting a solid trap with a teammate as the dribbler attempts to squeeze in between, I don't see how an official can call a trip on the defender (except for the OP team in the post IF this is what, indeed, happened). If the defender sticks his leg out into the path of the defender and the contact is made with the leg, I am OK with the block call. But, if the defender's feet are flat on the floor and he is assuming a good defensive stance and the ballhandler trips over the stationary foot, I don't see how this can be a foul on the defense.

[mick]

Originally Posted by CMHCoachNRef

Defenders NEVER play with their feet shoulder width apart.

...Unless they're attempting to take one for the team.

[CMHCoachNRef]

Originally Posted by mick

...Unless they're attempting to take one for the team.

Mick, you are absolutely right. But, in most of these cases, a blocking foul is the result since the "skinny as a stick" defender is so easy for the offensive player to slide around. The defender then tries to lean into the path of the offensive player.

I see far more PC fouls being drawn by the defender in a good solid stance, obtaining a legal guarding position and maintaining that position until the torso-to-torso contact.

[mick]

Originally Posted by CMHCoachNRef

I see far more PC fouls being drawn by the defender in a good solid stance, obtaining a legal guarding position and maintaining that position until the torso-to-torso contact.

Agreed.
Solid, wide stance up top, but shoulder-width stance in the paint.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by CMHCoachNRef

Defenders NEVER play with their feet shoulder width apart. If a player is in a good defensive stance (feet about six to twelve inches outside the shoulders), has both feet FLAT ON THE FLOOR, is setting a solid trap with a teammate as the dribbler attempts to squeeze in between, I don't see how an official can call a trip on the defender (except for the OP team in the post IF this is what, indeed, happened). If the defender sticks his leg out into the path of the defender and the contact is made with the leg, I am OK with the block call. But, if the defender's feet are flat on the floor and he is assuming a good defensive stance and the ballhandler trips over the stationary foot, I don't see how this can be a foul on the defense.

I would generally agree with this -- and my earlier "shoulder width" comment was meant to be "approximately." Perhaps better would be "elbow width" when in a deefensive stance.

And, just like the player who stands with the feet shoulder width apart, there are thosw who stand (or get caught in) a stance that's too wide -- and that becomes a block (in my game) if the offense trips over that defender's foot.