preventing the opponent from saving the ball?

[ysong]

Hi to all the old and new friends. Hope you can help me again as you did before.

It bothers me that when some one blocks the opponent who is trying to save the ball that is going OOB.

Somehow I think the block becomes illegal, when the blocker moves with the opponent, as in moving screen case. But I can not find any support from the rulebook.

Before I give up and convince myself it is legal, I want to get the bless from you guys. Do you consider it legal? if not, what is the rule basis to say it is illegal.

Thanks.

ysong

[BktBallRef]

If B1 is in front, then he's obtained the positioned first and is entitled to it. He can't extend his arms/legs or otherwise move into A1's path if he's beside him.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by ysong

Hi to all the old and new friends. Hope you can help me again as you did before.

It bothers me that when some one blocks the opponent who is trying to save the ball that is going OOB.

Somehow I think the block becomes illegal, when the blocker moves with the opponent, as in moving screen case. But I can not find any support from the rulebook.

Before I give up and convince myself it is legal, I want to get the bless from you guys. Do you consider it legal? if not, what is the rule basis to say it is illegal.

Thanks.

ysong

You are not going to find anything illegal, because based on what you have described there is nothing illegal. The purpose of a screen is to get in someone's way. But if you are talking about players going for the ball and one player stops, I do not see how that would be illegal. It is not technically a screen and the ball is loose.

Please stop using the term “moving screen.” The legality of the screen has nothing to do with if it is moving or not. You can have a stationary screen and still be illegal. Maybe that is why you are having a problem with the situation.

Peace

[ysong]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

If B1 is in front, then he's obtained the positioned first and is entitled to it. He can't extend his arms/legs or otherwise move into A1's path if he's beside him.

Thanks for the quick response!

It bothers me only when B1 moves with A1 (after initial contact occurs) when A1 is trying to go arround him to save the ball.

So you believe it is legal even in that case, right? regardless whoes front court it occurs, right?

Thanks.

ysong

[ysong]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

You are not going to find anything illegal, because based on what you have described there is nothing illegal. The purpose of a screen is to get in someone's way. But if you are talking about players going for the ball and one player stops, I do not see how that would be illegal. It is not technically a screen and the ball is loose.

Please stop using the term “moving screen.” The legality of the screen has nothing to do with if it is moving or not. You can have a stationary screen and still be illegal. Maybe that is why you are having a problem with the situation.

Peace

Thanks for your prompt response too!

Please see my reply to BktBallRef, thanks.

ysong

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

If B1 is in front, then he's obtained the positioned first and is entitled to it. He can't extend his arms/legs or otherwise move into A1's path if he's beside him.

What if B1 is in front and moves his leg and A1 trips and ends up falling?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

What if B1 is in front and moves his leg and A1 trips and ends up falling?

You are so bad.

Peace

[Forksref]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

What if B1 is in front and moves his leg and A1 trips and ends up falling?

We'd have to send that one to a committee as well as check the replay.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

What if B1 is in front and moves his leg and A1 trips and ends up falling?

That, my friend, would be traveling since the shot never actually cleared the bottom of the net and the player that caught it after it bounced out took several steps.

And that is the case even though it was really basket interference that happened so quickly the trail couldn't see it.

[mutantducky]

Monta Ellis on the warriors got a Tech after this happened.

The balls was loose and Jaric on the grizzlies got in the path of Ellis and bumped him. I thought the foul was going to be on Jaric but no call. I've had this before when the contact was unintentional so no call but in this case Ellis was going for the loose ball and while Jaric was in front he made sure to bump Ellis off his path.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by ysong

Thanks for the quick response!

It bothers me only when B1 moves with A1 (after initial contact occurs) when A1 is trying to go arround him to save the ball.

So you believe it is legal even in that case, right? regardless whoes front court it occurs, right?

Thanks.

ysong

Is there contact? If so, it could be an illegal screen.

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by ysong

Thanks for the quick response!

It bothers me only when B1 moves with A1 (after initial contact occurs) when A1 is trying to go arround him to save the ball.

So you believe it is legal even in that case, right? regardless whoes front court it occurs, right?

First, front court has nothing to do with it. No idea why you brought that into the question.

If B1 is in front and both player are moving in the same direction, then A1 is required to avoid the contact.

4-40-6
When screening an opponent who is moving in the same path and direction as the screener, the player behind is responsible if contact is made because the player in front slows up or stops and the player behind overruns his/her opponent.

[ysong]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Is there contact? If so, it could be an illegal screen.

Ok, here is the scenario in a thought experiment:

B1 steps into A1's path when A1 is trying to save the ball and minor contact occurs. then A1 tries to go around B1, but B1 moves side way with A1 while still in contact with A1, keeps blocking A1's path.

Legal or not? if not legal, what is the rule basis?

Thanks.

[JRutledge]

To me this is not much different than boxing out on a rebound. It could be based on how the ball started to go out of bounds. If the players are not displacing each other, personally I do not see anything illegal. This is not in the tradition of a screen and we do not consider a box out to be illegal even when there is contact.

Peace

[Adam]

Originally Posted by ysong

Ok, here is the scenario in a thought experiment:

B1 steps into A1's path when A1 is trying to save the ball and minor contact occurs. then A1 tries to go around B1, but B1 moves side way with A1 while still in contact with A1, keeps blocking A1's path.

Legal or not? if not legal, what is the rule basis?

Thanks.

Legal. The contact is incidental unless it actually physically prevents A1 from getting to where he wants to go.

I don't need a rule to show you it's legal. You need a rule to show it's illegal.