Bilas

[fullor30]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

The definition of screening is the same for NFHS, NCAA, and FIBA. And this was a legal screen all of the way. The screener braced himself for the impending contact, which is legal.

MTD, Sr.

Tough one.....I'm going the other way on this with the luxury of replay. Screener shuffled slightly to left of defender.

I think collision surprised trail.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by fullor30

Tough one.....I'm going the other way on this with the luxury of replay. Screener shuffled slightly to left of defender.

I think collision surprised trail.

Fullor30:

What was so tough about this play? This was a casebook play. I would expect a first year official to recognize this as a legal screen.

MTD, Sr.

[SamIAm]

With the benefit of replay - I see a foul. Screener, after turning at FT line moves three times. Initial sets up on one side of "the A on the floor". Moves to the middle of the A, then moves again to the other side of the A. The last moves give him "square contact" as opposed to glancing contact. Big difference in the effectiveness of the screen. Maybe I am disecting the screen too much, but once he is set to screen with a glancing blow, then moves with the defender not having a step to avoid (blind screen), I see a foul.

[fiasco]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Fullor30:

What was so tough about this play? This was a casebook play. I would expect a first year official to recognize this as a legal screen.

MTD, Sr.

You're right, this is a textbook case play.

The screener does not give time and distance upon being set (for the final time).

The screener leans into the opponent's path.

Illegal screen.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by fiasco

You're right, this is a textbook case play.

The screener does not give time and distance upon being set (for the final time).

The screener leans into the opponent's path.

Illegal screen.

Fiasco:

When I watch this play as an engineer I see an inelastic collision between stationary object of large mass and a small mass moving at a high rate of velocity.

When I watch this play as a basketball official I see G2 setting a legal screen against B1. Once again, this is a casebook play for a legal screen. Yes, B1 went down hard, but that is the result of an inelastic collision (see the above paragraph). Normally, I will not question a fellow official's judgement, but I will make exceptions for guarding/screening (block/charge) situations. I am sorry but this is a legal screen and there is not any defense to call it anything but a legal screen.

MTD, Sr.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Fiasco:

When I watch this play as an engineer I see an inelastic collision between stationary object of large mass and a small mass moving at a high rate of velocity.

When I watch this play as a basketball official I see G2 setting a legal screen against B1. Once again, this is a casebook play for a legal screen. Yes, B1 went down hard, but that is the result of an inelastic collision (see the above paragraph). Normally, I will not question a fellow official's judgement, but I will make exceptions for guarding/screening (block/charge) situations. I am sorry but this is a legal screen and there is not any defense to call it anything but a legal screen.

MTD, Sr.

Let me add a "me too," although I have merely a math degree.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Fiasco:

When I watch this play as an engineer I see an inelastic collision between stationary object of large mass and a small mass moving at a high rate of velocity.

Stationary is the key word. In the still photo the guy is at least 20 degrees away from vertical. He leaned into the contact, then also lifted his forearm at the point of impact. Subtle, perhaps, and size was a big factor in the play, but in my eyes, this guy delivered a blow.

[fiasco]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Fiasco:

When I watch this play as an engineer I see an inelastic collision between stationary object of large mass and a small mass moving at a high rate of velocity.

When I watch this play as a basketball official I see G2 setting a legal screen against B1. Once again, this is a casebook play for a legal screen. Yes, B1 went down hard, but that is the result of an inelastic collision (see the above paragraph). Normally, I will not question a fellow official's judgement, but I will make exceptions for guarding/screening (block/charge) situations. I am sorry but this is a legal screen and there is not any defense to call it anything but a legal screen.

MTD, Sr.

In regards to the rules, it doesn't matter how bad the impact was.

I have demonstrated, based on the video and the screen shot and the rules, how it was illegal.

Can you demonstrate how it was legal?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by fiasco

In regards to the rules, it doesn't matter how bad the impact was.

I have demonstrated, based on the video and the screen shot and the rules, how it was illegal.

Can you demonstrate how it was legal?

1) It's not a blind screen.

2) Although not 90* to the floor, I'm not sure that the player fails the verticality test (but it's close).

As a practical matter, some leeway is given in determining the angle that still meets the "verticality" standard.

[jbduke]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Fiasco:

When I watch this play as an engineer I see an inelastic collision between stationary object of large mass and a small mass moving at a high rate of velocity.

When I watch this play as a basketball official I see G2 setting a legal screen against B1. Once again, this is a casebook play for a legal screen. Yes, B1 went down hard, but that is the result of an inelastic collision (see the above paragraph). Normally, I will not question a fellow official's judgement, but I will make exceptions for guarding/screening (block/charge) situations. I am sorry but this is a legal screen and there is not any defense to call it anything but a legal screen.

MTD, Sr.

Ah, the last rhetorical refuge of any desperate litigant. Sometimes referred to as "petitio principii," or "begging the question," it is more commonly known as the "Because I said so" fallacy.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by jbduke

Ah, the last rhetorical refuge of any desperate litigant. Sometimes referred to as "petitio principii," or "begging the question," it is more commonly known as the "Because I said so" fallacy.

Counselor:

I say so because G2 met all of the requirements of the definition of screening. Furthermore, the late Ed Ferrigno, a former member of the NFHS Rules Committee and State Interpreter for Connecticut was probably the most knowledgeable person regarding guarding/screening in the country and I helped him give seminars on block/charge, so I consider myself pretty knowledgeable about guarding and screening too. So when I say that G2 set a legal screen you can pretty well take it to the bank.

MTD, Sr.

[jbduke]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Counselor:

I say so because G2 met all of the requirements of the definition of screening. Furthermore, the late Ed Ferrigno, a former member of the NFHS Rules Committee and State Interpreter for Connecticut was probably the most knowledgeable person regarding guarding/screening in the country and I helped him give seminars on block/charge, so I consider myself pretty knowledgeable about guarding and screening too. So when I say that G2 set a legal screen you can pretty well take it to the bank.

MTD, Sr.

Look, I'm not trying to get into a ****ing match here. I just think it's interesting that you made your argument--an argument that some found compelling, some not so much--and then when you didn't convince everybody, you begged the question.

And now you've committed another fallacy, the appeal to authority. It's a mighty fancy appeal to be sure, but one that is nevertheless lacking in argumentative force.

To this observer, it seems clear that reasonable people can disagree on the play. You may reject that notion (and you may even be correct), but fallacious arguments don't help anyone get anywhere.