Just like that

[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.

[BillyMac]

I have always been of the opinion that there is a difference between tripping, and being tripped.

That said, what if a player is in legal guarding position, and has their feet wider than their shoulders, and, for sake of argument, has obtained that position on the court, and remains in that position for, let's say, oh, ten seconds, motionless, and then a dribbler tries to dribble past this motionless defender and trips over the defender's leg. I have a no call. Please correct me if I'm wrong. Please.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

I have always been of the opinion that there is a difference between tripping, and being tripped.

That said, what if a player is in legal guarding position, and has their feet wider than their shoulders, and, for sake of argument, has obtained that position on the court, and remains in that position for, let's say, oh, ten seconds, motionless, and then a dribbler tries to dribble past this motionless defender and trips over the defender's leg. I have a no call. Please correct me if I'm wrong. Please.

How much wider than the shoulders? I think that matters.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

I have always been of the opinion that there is a difference between tripping, and being tripped.

That said, what if a player is in legal guarding position, and has their feet wider than their shoulders, and, for sake of argument, has obtained that position on the court, and remains in that position for, let's say, oh, ten seconds, motionless, and then a dribbler tries to dribble past this motionless defender and trips over the defender's leg. I have a no call. Please correct me if I'm wrong. Please.

Legs extended wider than a "normal stance"....I have a block. The amount of time the player is there is irrelevant.

[CMHCoachNRef]

Originally Posted by mick

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

You show me a post player whose feet are "shoulder width apart stance in the paint" and I will show you a bench warmer. There is NO WAY a post defender can have his feet that close together -- especially since the offensive post man with his back to him is wider than that!!! If a post defender has his feet shoulder width apart, he will get drop-stepped to death.

If a defensive player is in a good solid stance -- if the defender is too wide, he will have no mobility and the offensive player will easily get around him even if the offensive player has to lift a foot over the defender to do it -- his feet will be wider than shoulder width apart.

If you doubt this, watch a televised high school or college game for a few minutes. Skinny-as-a-stick defenders will not be anywhere to be found -- with the possible exception of a defensive perimeter player not accustomed to playing down there.

[mick]

Originally Posted by CMHCoachNRef

You show me a post player whose feet are "shoulder width apart stance in the paint" and I will show you a bench warmer. There is NO WAY a post defender can have his feet that close together -- especially since the offensive post man with his back to him is wider than that!!! If a post defender has his feet shoulder width apart, he will get drop-stepped to death.

Sorry, Coach.
I was envisioning a defender legally playing straight up and being protected by the rules.

[CMHCoachNRef]

Originally Posted by mick

Sorry, Coach.
I was envisioning a defender legally playing straight up and being protected by the rules.

I guess we envision a different game.

[OHBBREF]

Does not the greater responsibility to avoid contact fall upon the player with the ball?
Rule 10
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. The dribbler should not be permitted additional rights in executing a jump try for goal, pivoting, feinting or in starting a dribble.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by OHBBREF

Does not the greater responsibility to avoid contact fall upon the player with the ball?

Only in certain circumstances, and I don't think they apply in the play being discussed.