When Is It Incidental?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

No, because B1 had obtained (NFHS)/established (NCAA/FIBA) a legal guarding position against A1.

MTD, Sr.

I accept Nevada's explanation with regard to visual field. In the first scenario, however, LGP isn't an issue because A1 does not have the ball.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

I accept Nevada's explanation with regard to visual field. In the first scenario, however, LGP isn't an issue because A1 does not have the ball.

Don't forget that guarding can occur on an opponent without the ball too.
Basically, the same requirements apply as a screening situation. I quoted the screening rules before because the visual field concept comes from those and that is what you inquired about.

4-23-5 . . . Guarding a moving opponent without the ball:
a. Time and distance are factors required to obtain an initial legal position.
b. The guard must give the opponent the time and/or distance to avoid
contact.
c. The distance need not be more than two strides.
d. If the opponent is airborne, the guard must have obtained legal position
before the opponent left the floor.

[Adam]

I know guarding can come with and without the ball, but the question is which rules apply. LGP gives the defender more protection than screening principles.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

I know guarding can come with and without the ball, but the question is which rules apply. LGP gives the defender more protection than screening principles.

Is he guarding him or trying to screen him? You need to made that decision, and then apply the appropriate rules.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Is he guarding him or trying to screen him? You need to made that decision, and then apply the appropriate rules.

Wow, the difference is very small. Sometimes guarding amounts to screening the player from getting to where he wants to go. I see your point though, but I had just assumed that with or without the ball was what made the difference between which rule to apply.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Wow, the difference is very small. Sometimes guarding amounts to screening the player from getting to where he wants to go. I see your point though, but I had just assumed that with or without the ball was what made the difference between which rule to apply.

The only practical difference, as I see it, is that the visual field element only applies to screening. A player who is guarding has no such restrictions....only time/distance as determined by whether the player has the ball or is moving. A defender can take a guarding position outside of the visual field a stationary opponent with no requirement that they allow room for a step.

[Adam]

Okay, so how do you determine which rule comes into play? In the OP, the defender is really guarding by screening.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

I accept Nevada's explanation with regard to visual field. In the first scenario, however, LGP isn't an issue because A1 does not have the ball.

Snaqs:

That was your problem when you played basketball in H.S., you never (with apologies to the late J. Dallas Shirley) guarded your opponent if he did not have the ball, .

MTD, Sr.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Snaqs:

That was your problem when you played basketball in H.S., you never (with apologies to the late J. Dallas Shirley) guarded your opponent if he did not have the ball, .

MTD, Sr.

Congratulations on finding my old high school coach.