Closely Guarded Dilemma

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Back In The Saddle

ART. 1 . . . Guarding is the act of legally placing the body in the path of an offensive opponent. There is no minimum distance required between the guard and opponent, but the maximum is 6 feet when closely guarded.

If the defender is behind the dribbler, he ain't guarding. Therefore there is no count. Therefore you got it right.

Let me ask a few questions to probe whether such an interpretation has any merit....

Are you saying you can't have a CG count if the player with the ball has his back to the defender? that all a player with the ball has to do to break the count is spin around so that the defender is behind him?

Are you suggesting that all a dribbler has to to to break the count is to take a single step away from the defender? (perhaps while facing away).

What if the dribbler is moving laterally with the defender tracking right with him in a parallel path? Is that not CG?

What if the dribbler is not even moving? By your interpretation of "path", there is no CG count since a stationary player has no "path". So, could a stationary player hold the ball indefinitely?

It would be nearly impossible, with such an interpretation, to ever get past 1 or 2...or even 0 with a clever player holding the ball in the corner facing OOB (no player could legally get in front of such a ball holder).

Can such an interpretation with so many holes be right?

That said, I don't think the OP's play is a CG situation...not with the defender following the player all the way across the court. Sounds like he was not containing or corralling the dribbler at all.

[Back In The Saddle]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Let me ask a few questions to probe whether such an interpretation has any merit....

Interpretation? Okay, I guess so. I'd say my understanding of the written rules, which is what I quoted. But we are talking about application of the written rules, and I suppose it's fair to call that interpretation.

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Are you saying you can't have a CG count if the player with the ball has his back to the defender? that all a player with the ball has to do to break the count is spin around so that the defender is behind him?

I'm not saying can't, never, no-how. In the original situation, the dribbler is moving away from the guard, and the guard is "squarely behind" him. As I envision it, that's the guard trying hard to keep up with the dribbler but unable to get into his path. And since the dribbler's intent is to just run out the clock, his legitimate path, in my judgment, is from side to side and not to the basket. So the would-be guard is not in the path, and is therefore not actually guarding, and the dribbler is therefore not guarded, closely or otherwise.

As for merely being behind the dribbler...would you have a count on a breakaway layup if the "guard" were able to keep within six feet. I wouldn't.

As for getting out of a count by simply turning your back to the defender, no, it would not end a count. However, when a post player with the ball is back to the basket, trying to back down his guard, or drop step around him, shouldn't we have a count going? By rule, certainly. But we never do.

So it's probably fair to say that as a general principle turning your back to a defender does not end a count, but we wouldn't normally start one with the dribbler's back to the defender.

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Are you suggesting that all a dribbler has to to to break the count is to take a single step away from the defender? (perhaps while facing away).

Oftentimes, a single step is enough to break distance, even if only for a moment. Six feet, when you're talking about HS age players, isn't very far when measured in steps.

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

What if the dribbler is moving laterally with the defender tracking right with him in a parallel path? Is that not CG?

I like Snaq's definition of path on this. If you judge that the dribbler's intent is to advance the ball to the basket, then this kind of "tracking" is guarding and I would most likely have a count. If the dribbler's intent is to not advance the ball, but is to run out the clock, then the dribbler's path is not toward the basket and the would-be guard isn't in the dribbler's path.

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

What if the dribbler is not even moving? By your interpretation of "path", there is no CG count since a stationary player has no "path". So, could a stationary player hold the ball indefinitely?

Path implies movement, and my "interpretation" was offered in the context of a moving dribbler. Nevada quoted a relevant case play about how to apply the rule to a stationary ball handler.

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

It would be nearly impossible, with such an interpretation, to ever get past 1 or 2...or even 0 with a clever player holding the ball in the corner facing OOB (no player could legally get in front of such a ball holder).

Again, this is a stationary ball handler. We routinely have a count going on a ball handler trapped in a corner. Though, to be honest, there's usually so much to process at once (count, lots of potential contact to judge, listening for a timeout request) that who has time to consider which way the ball handler is facing? And I've already stated that in my thinking once you've got a count, the ball handler cannot escape it simply by turning his back to the defender.

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Can such an interpretation with so many holes be right?

We've gone round and round a time or two over what exactly "in the path" means, and can't agree on a good, simple, single definition. It very clearly needs some context and requires some judgment in order to apply. But it is the rule.

However, I don't think "in the path" is *the* single, make or break criteria for judging whether a dribbler is closely guarded. But it is an important criteria. And, IMHO, in the OP's sitch, it is a criteria that was not being met.

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

That said, I don't think the OP's play is a CG situation...not with the defender following the player all the way across the court. Sounds like he was not containing or corralling the dribbler at all.

I agree with your sentiment. But I also think it's even more problematic than "in the path." First, there's no rulebook support for the notion of containing or corralling a dribbler. Second, you have the difficult task of defining what containing or corralling is. Then we have to consider all the "corner cases" and see if it holds up as a useful interpretation. But it also only applies in certain situations. Can you still be guarding even if you're not containing or corralling? Clearly you can.

But I think we're largely in agreement on the basic sentiment. By the criteria we have chosen to base our judgment on, in the OP the would-be guard is not actually guarding the dribbler. So why count?

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Back In The Saddle

As for getting out of a count by simply turning your back to the defender, no, it would not end a count. However, when a post player with the ball is back to the basket, trying to back down his guard, or drop step around him, shouldn't we have a count going? By rule, certainly. But we never do.

In the words of Maxwell Smart, "not so fast my good friend".

[Adam]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

In the words of Maxwell Smart, "not so fast my good friend".

Agreed. I normally have a count here, unless I forget or something.

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Agreed. I normally have a count here, unless I forget or something.

Even as L?

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

Even as L?

Only in the NBA.

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Only in the NBA.

And NCAA-W.

But I've been told not in Fed. or NCAA-M. And I do not understand the reason why. (Actually, I've never been told definitively why, just that it is not done.)

[Adam]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

Even as L?

Yes.

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Yes.

Well, I like that, even though I've been told the L never has a closely-guarded count.

Now, just to get the discussion back on track, and this question is more for BITS I suppose - since the defender B1 is behind post player A1, would you not count if you knew A1 was not going to make a move for the basket and was simply looking to pass it out to an open guard? Defensive player is behind the dribbler, dribbler is moving "E-W", or even away from the basket? Does proximity to the basket have any effect on whether a count is started or not? If so, how far away from the basket does the player have to be before you decide a count is no longer necessary, and why?

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Back In The Saddle

Interpretation? Okay, I guess so. I'd say my understanding of the written rules, which is what I quoted. But we are talking about application of the written rules, and I suppose it's fair to call that interpretation.
....

But I think we're largely in agreement on the basic sentiment. By the criteria we have chosen to base our judgment on, in the OP the would-be guard is not actually guarding the dribbler. So why count?

Good...that is what I thought you really meant but just wanted to probe the statement about the defender being "behind" the dribbler.

Sounds like we're on the same practical page.

You know, if the offensive kid in the OP was coached correctly, the whole closely guarded thread wouldn't have happened if he would have just ripped a silent, but deadly quaff towards the defender.