Closely Guarded Dilemma

[lmeadski]

I tried to articulate team A trying to stall out the balance of the game by moving the ball across the court, not advancing to the hoop, and avoiding a closely guarded call. As B1 came up on A1 to induce a chop, A1 would dribble parallel to the half court line. B1 trailed behind him to the other side within a 6 foot radius. The coach was screaming for closely guarded, but, I couldn't make that call as B1 was squarely behind A1. It wasn't that he had his back turned to him. It's probably that I have never seen anyone, HS, NCAA or pro ever call closely guarded in this scenario. However, I think we can admit we see it regularly, especially in HS or JR high.

[Adam]

I think you could justify either way in your scenario, frankly. I would agree that this does not likely represent guarding, however, especially if he's just walking. Get in front, in his path, or between the dribbler and the basket. Or, if the offensive player was really trying to retreat and the defender was moving quickly to keep pace, I would call it.

It's not the direction necessarily, in other words.

And I've never seen this play happen, period. The defender should try to steal the ball or get in front of the moving dribbler, if the dribbler was only walking.

[bob jenkins]

I think "path" needs to be defined by the defender, not by the offensive player.

If the defender is trying to prevent the offensive player from getting to (or toward) the basket, then the count stops when the head and shoulders are closer to the basket.

In this play, the defender is trying to prevent (I guess) the defender from going back W-to-E, so I'd still have a count -- or a violation.

[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.

[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.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

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.)

Question for NCAA-W. If the play starts outside the 3-point line in the corner and then is passed into the post is the Trail going to get that count or will this be the Lead's new primary.

[ILMalti]

If the rules were applied as the book says we would have a consistency across the board. Until the rule changes or is officially interpreted differently then it should be "ruled/administered" as described in 4.23 and 9.10.2-3. From what I recall the CG count is to eliminate delay tactics and get the game moving.

Based on some threads logic , we should not have a BC 10 second count if the offense move EAST to WEST? I could imagine the "noise" this would create I realize that this is a stresh in my discussion

If the rule is followed, nobody can argue. It is in black and white (so to speak) supported by the appropiate BB bodies. I think it is when officials ( I am a young official) who know the rulling and apply them at their discretion is one of the reasons we have so many issues with fans, players and coaches .

For example would a diagonal movement constitue a drive to the basket or just a East-2-West move?

The offense have up to 14 seconds (4.9 sec hold, 4.9 sec dribble 4.9 sec hold integer) to stop a violation from happening that is a very long time and credit should be given to the defense for preventing the ball to move towards the basket.

[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?