preventing the opponent from saving the ball?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by ysong

So you do NOT believe a *defense* player is entiled by the rules to move with the opponent while keeps body contact and blocks the opponent's path, do I understand you correctly?

Also, I assume you believe "illegal screen" applys equally to both defense side and offense side, correct? (somehow I thought it only applied to offense side.)

Then, it seems very hard for a defense player to *keep* boxing out an opponent without committing a foul.

Thanks.

The rules need to be applied both as they are literally written and as they are commonly interpreted.

If A1 is making a concerted effort to get around B1, and B1 is preventing this by moving and making illegal contact, then it's a foul.

This happens relatively rarely.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by ysong

Also, I assume you believe "illegal screen" applys equally to both defense side and offense side, correct? (somehow I thought it only applied to offense side.)

The words offense and defense do not appear in the definition of screen.

[ysong]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

It's exactly the same.

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

If A1 is making a concerted effort to get around B1, and B1 is preventing this by moving and making illegal contact, then it's a foul.

Please allow me to rephase your statement. You are saying:

"If A1 is making a concerted effort to get around B1, and B1 is preventing this by moving and making contact, then it's a foul", correct?

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by ysong

Please allow me to rephase your statement. You are saying:

"If A1 is making a concerted effort to get around B1, and B1 is preventing this by moving and making contact, then it's a foul", correct?

No, not correct.

[ysong]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

No, not correct.

Listening...

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by ysong

Listening...

It was exactly as Bob said. Contact alone is not illegal.


If B1's arms are extended into A1's path AND A1 has a reasonable chance to actually save the ball, it could be a foul.

If B1 is throwing a hip into A1 AND A1 has a reasonable chance to actually save the ball, it could be a foul.

If B1 is moving into/towards A1 AND A1 has a reasonable chance to actually save the ball, it could be a foul.

If B1 is moving towards the ball keeping their torso in A1's path and is doing so in a way that makes it difficult for A1 to get to the ball, it will likely not be a foul. B1 earned the better position and is not required to yield it to A1 just because A1 wants the ball. B1 is not required to actually save the ball in order to realize the advantage of the position.

Imagine if B1 were, instead, going for the ball and A1 made the same contact, would it be a foul on B1, no. In fact, you could have a foul on A1 for coming through B1 (pushing). Now, if B1 just goes for it a little less enthusiasticaly...a bit slower....does that give A1 the right to come through B1? No. A1 has to go around B1...but B1 doesn't have to permit it.

All of this assumes A1 and B1 start from positions that are near each other....A1 is NOT running full speed towards the ball. If A1 was running full speed, B1 would be required to be in A1's path a little sooner...as guarding principles on a moving opponent without the ball require that B1 is in the path allowing time/distance for A1 to adjust.

[ysong]

Hi Camron, thanks for your explainations.

But, my understanding is, Bob is saying the ensuing contact alone *in this particular (screen) case described in OP* is sufficient to make B1's move illegal, even without any illegal use of arms, hip, etc.

Correct, Bob?

Thanks.

[doubleringer]

I kind of skimmed the 3 pages of responses so if my point has already been discussed, I apologize. I wanted to bring up the fact that how the ball becomes loose has some bearing on this play. If it is on a try, there is no team control, thus it would be very difficult to call this an illegal screen. I tend to look at plays like this in the same manner that I address rebounding. Who has the position on the floor, how did they get there, and what are they doing to keep that position? If they are doing these things in a legal manner, I have nothing (which is generally the case on this play).