Closely Guarded Dilemma

[Adam]

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.

I disagree with this concept as written. The call I'm thinking specifically is of a dribbler driving towards the basket, then retreating when he's been stopped. While retreating, the defender follows him closely. Are you saying you'll terminate the count once the dribbler begins his retreat because the defender is no longer in his path?

"In the path" is, IMO, subjective. I wish I could see the play in the OP to make my call. I see nothing in the OP that tells me there should be no count, but I could be seeing it wrong.

I think the path can be defined one of two ways: the general direction between the player and where he could reasonably be expected to want the ball, and the direction he is obviously moving.

[Back In The Saddle]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

I disagree with this concept as written. The call I'm thinking specifically is of a dribbler driving towards the basket, then retreating when he's been stopped. While retreating, the defender follows him closely. Are you saying you'll terminate the count once the dribbler begins his retreat because the defender is no longer in his path?

"In the path" is, IMO, subjective. I wish I could see the play in the OP to make my call. I see nothing in the OP that tells me there should be no count, but I could be seeing it wrong.

I think the path can be defined one of two ways: the general direction between the player and where he could reasonably be expected to want the ball, and the direction he is obviously moving.

This is a funny old rule, isn't it? So much of the time it's HTBT.

In your scenario, it's not a given that I'll have a count on the guy driving to the basket in the first place, it depends on what happened previously. If I had a count before he began his drive, then I'm probably continuing it...slowly. But if I didn't have a count before the drive there's no way I'll start a count during it. However....if he stops his drive and backs out, the reality is that he is almost certain to break distance with the defender because it'll take a moment for the defender to react to the change in direction.

For the most part I agree with your interpretation of "in the path". But clearly the first half, "where he could reasonably be expected to want the ball", requires us to make some judgments about his intent. And, though I'm sure to get crispied up by the literal interpretation crowd for saying this, I believe proper application of the closely guarded rule absolutely requires good judgment.

My thinking goes like this:

* In the game of basketball the defense has ample opportunity to obtain the ball through their own efforts. They can steal it from the ball handler, intercept a pass, force a poor shot and get the rebound, pressure the ball handler into violating, etc.
* The intent of the closely guarded rule is to force the offense to act, not to reward the defense. A five second count is not an end, only a means.
* When the offense is moving the ball and forcing the action, the intent of the rule is met and we should be reluctant to start a count. We don't want to send the ball the other way when the offense is complying with the intent of the rule.
* When the offense is holding the ball AND the defense is playing defense, we should be quicker to start a count. Not to reward the defense with a turnover, but to force the offense to act and thereby allow the defense the opportunity to obtain the ball through their own defensive efforts.
* However, if the defense isn't up to the task, if they don't have the skill and quickness to obtain the ball, that is their problem. In this situation when you begin hearing coaches, players, fans hollering for "five seconds!" you know they've given up on their own efforts and are looking for you to bail them out. We should be slow to do so.

So, as I imagine the original situation, the defender running after the ball handler, *trying* to guard him, but unable to do so... he ain't gettin no stinkin count from me. Playing keep away is a legitimate, if perhaps undesirable, offensive tactic. But it does not deny the defense the opportunity to play defense. So why help the defense?

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Back In The Saddle

This is a funny old rule, isn't it? So much of the time it's HTBT.

In your scenario, it's not a given that I'll have a count on the guy driving to the basket in the first place, it depends on what happened previously. If I had a count before he began his drive, then I'm probably continuing it...slowly. But if I didn't have a count before the drive there's no way I'll start a count during it. However....if he stops his drive and backs out, the reality is that he is almost certain to break distance with the defender because it'll take a moment for the defender to react to the change in direction.

For the most part I agree with your interpretation of "in the path". But clearly the first half, "where he could reasonably be expected to want the ball", requires us to make some judgments about his intent. And, though I'm sure to get crispied up by the literal interpretation crowd for saying this, I believe proper application of the closely guarded rule absolutely requires good judgment.

My thinking goes like this:

* In the game of basketball the defense has ample opportunity to obtain the ball through their own efforts. They can steal it from the ball handler, intercept a pass, force a poor shot and get the rebound, pressure the ball handler into violating, etc.
* The intent of the closely guarded rule is to force the offense to act, not to reward the defense. A five second count is not an end, only a means.
* When the offense is moving the ball and forcing the action, the intent of the rule is met and we should be reluctant to start a count. We don't want to send the ball the other way when the offense is complying with the intent of the rule.
* When the offense is holding the ball AND the defense is playing defense, we should be quicker to start a count. Not to reward the defense with a turnover, but to force the offense to act and thereby allow the defense the opportunity to obtain the ball through their own defensive efforts.
* However, if the defense isn't up to the task, if they don't have the skill and quickness to obtain the ball, that is their problem. In this situation when you begin hearing coaches, players, fans hollering for "five seconds!" you know they've given up on their own efforts and are looking for you to bail them out. We should be slow to do so.

So, as I imagine the original situation, the defender running after the ball handler, *trying* to guard him, but unable to do so... he ain't gettin no stinkin count from me. Playing keep away is a legitimate, if perhaps undesirable, offensive tactic. But it does not deny the defense the opportunity to play defense. So why help the defense?

This thread is the perfect collision of rulebook officials and common sense officials (I don't mean either phrase pejoratively). I sit somewhere in the middle. I'd probably have a count going, but I can't guarantee I would.