Short of time? Draw a foul!

[Old_School]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

We've had this (rather long) discussion a little while back when the NFHS ruling came out. First, all the NFHS said was A1 cannot have LGP, because one foot is OOB, or on the line. The discussion was whether A1 could still take a charge, even without LGP. I happen to feel that, even though A1 does not have LGP, they could still draw a charge if they were set and in the spot well before B1 got there. Not having LGP doesn't mean A1 can never draw a charge, only that they are more responsible for contact if it occurs in a close situation.

Have you read case book play 4.23.3SitB(a) lately? That couldn't be more explicit and it says that your premise is wrong.

[Adam]

I'm away from home this week, can someone post the case play?

I don't recall that this case said a stationary defender could be guilty of a block. I recall it mentions a player maintaining LGP (that means moving), and the very specific reasoning for calling the block was the loss of LGP. If LGP is not required, then the case play is not relevant.

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by Old_School

Have you read case book play 4.23.3SitB(a) lately? That couldn't be more explicit and it says that your premise is wrong.

So, are you saying the only time a player can be charged with a player-control foul is when there is contact with a player with LGP?

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Old_School

Have you read case book play 4.23.3SitB(a) lately? That couldn't be more explicit and it says that your premise is wrong.

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

I'm away from home this week, can someone post the case play? I don't recall that this case said a stationary defender could be guilty of a block. I recall it mentions a player maintaining LGP (that means moving), and the very specific reasoning for calling the block was the loss of LGP. If LGP is not required, then the case play is not relevant.

4.23.3 SITUATION B: 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)

Bottom line: May a screener, assuming that all the other conditions of a legal screen are met (time, distance, moving opponent, stationary opponent, blind, side, short of contact, etc.), have one foot on a boundary line, and still be considered to have set a legal screen? And, again, I know that legal guarding position has nothing to do with setting a legal screen. Help. Please.

[Adam]

I say yes, but I've been less than perfect lately.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Bottom line: May a screener, assuming that all the other conditions of a legal screen are met (time, distance, moving opponent, stationary opponent, blind, side, short of contact, etc.), have one foot on a boundary line, and still be considered to have set a legal screen? And, again, I know that legal guarding position has nothing to do with setting a legal screen. Help. Please.

We have debated this play more than once. Most recently, I think, on the NFHS Forum. The only time I see that a screen set next to a boundary line would be utilized effectively is on a throw-in after a made basket. In this case it is legal for the offensive player to be out of bounds. So how can it be illegal for him to have one foot out of bounds in the process of setting a screen? Some say it is, as I recall.

[MajorCord]

Can anyone provide a link to the video of this play? Thanks!

[A Pennsylvania Coach]

I ran this play twice as a coach. Once we got the contact but no call, and another time we got no contact (the defender spotted the screen and pulled up). I was glad to see it work when I saw this highlight a week or two ago.

[IUgrad92]

Originally Posted by MajorCord

Can anyone provide a link to the video of this play? Thanks!

YouTube - Western Carolina Lady Catamounts last second play SoCon Tournament

[refguy]

Originally Posted by IUgrad92

YouTube - Western Carolina Lady Catamounts last second play SoCon Tournament

Wow!!
Talk about a bang bang play. Too much contact for a no call.... could be a block or charge - either way huge ramifications on the game. Block call would have given the defense the ball for a throw-in. I think the trail had a terrible look at the play, as well, trying to see through the defender to the screener and officiating the inbound as well. The C probably had the best chance at a look but was at the division line (rightly so) ready to officiate a catch and shoot.

Art. 3. A player shall not:
a. Cause contact by setting a screen outside the visual field of a stationary
opponent that does not allow this opponent a normal step to move.
b. Make contact with the opponent when setting a screen within the visual
field of that opponent.
c. Take a position so close to a moving opponent that this opponent cannot
avoid contact by stopping or changing direction.