Avoiding Contact

[bas2456]

I've run into this play several times already this young season

A1 has a fast break, but he's not all alone. B1 hustles back on D, and sets up in LGP. A1, seeing this, clearly makes a concerted effort to avoid contact. B1 does not move while A1 is avoiding.

I've got no call, what do you have?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by bas2456

I've run into this play several times already this young season

A1 has a fast break, but he's not all alone. B1 hustles back on D, and sets up in LGP. A1, seeing this, clearly makes a concerted effort to avoid contact. B1 does not move while A1 is avoiding.

I've got no call, what do you have?

Is there contact? Does it disadvantage or move B1? A1's intent is irrelevant here.

[Clark Kent]

Full on contact = Player control foul.

A slight brush as A1 athletically avoids B1, but there is a brush and no displacement = nothing.

B1 sliding a hip or knee or shoulder in A1's direction as A1 avoids the contact = Block on B1

Any marginal contact with B1 in LGP would be a pure judgement call on the situation and would vary, depending on if I felt B1 flopped or A1 avoided contact.

[bas2456]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Is there contact? Does it disadvantage or move B1? A1's intent is irrelevant here.

There was slight contact in the play I'm thinking of, but it was neither advantageous nor disadvantageous to either player.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by bas2456

There was slight contact in the play I'm thinking of, but it was neither advantageous nor disadvantageous to either player.

It sounds like a no-call to me, but intent has nothing to do with it. If B1 was not disadvantaged nor displaced in any way, play on.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by bas2456

There was slight contact in the play I'm thinking of, but it was neither advantageous nor disadvantageous to either player.

If this is true, no matter what else did or didn't happen, no foul.

[chartrusepengui]

depends,

was there any contact? if not - nothing. However, B1 is not required to move just because A1 does. So if B1 had gained LGP and was in LPG when contacted by A1 whether he was going to basket or making a concerted effort to avoid contact, it is a PC on A1.

Would you tell the coach of A1 that you didn't call a block on B1 when they realized they didn't have LGP and were making a concerted effort to get out of A1's way when contact occurred and A1 lost the ball?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by chartrusepengui

depends,

was there any contact? if not - nothing. However, B1 is not required to move just because A1 does. So if B1 had gained LGP and was in LPG when contacted by A1 whether he was going to basket or making a concerted effort to avoid contact, it is a PC on A1.

Not necessarily. Contact isn't necessarily a foul. That said, "inent" is irrelevant.

[chartrusepengui]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Not necessarily. Contact isn't necessarily a foul. That said, "inent" is irrelevant.

I agree that intent is irrelevant. I was trying to say that if B1 has obtained and is in LGP and A1 makes contact - A1 is responsible for the contact. If there is contact and A1 gains any type of advantage whether in going to basket, up for a try, or even dishing to A2 because of the any slight advantage gained by contact it is going to be called. I would not give the offensive player any benefit of the doubt in this scenario. B1 did their job, A1 didn't.

[Jimmie24]

Why are we focused on him maintaining LGP? As long as B is able to gain LGP and then does not move towards A, he is fine. A in this scenario is solely responsiple for any and all contact that is made. B has done his job. Now the official must determine if it is enough contact to warrant a player control foul. If it is not then there is nothing to call. If there is bang it and move on. All B has to do is establish his position. He does not need to maintain LGP. He could turn around and duck to try and avoid a big collision and he still is able to maintain status.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Jimmie24

Why are we focused on him maintaining LGP? As long as B is able to gain LGP and then does not move towards A, he is fine. A in this scenario is solely responsiple for any and all contact that is made. B has done his job. Now the official must determine if it is enough contact to warrant a player control foul. If it is not then there is nothing to call. If there is bang it and move on. All B has to do is establish his position. He does not need to maintain LGP. He could turn around and duck to try and avoid a big collision and he still is able to maintain status.

All those things you said are "maintaining LGP"

[Mregor]

Originally Posted by bas2456

A1 has a fast break, but he's not all alone. B1 hustles back on D, and sets up in LGP. A1, seeing this, clearly makes a concerted effort to avoid contact. B1 does not move while A1 is avoiding.

I've got no call, what do you have?

What could you have? As worded, there is nothing to call.

Mregor

[Nevadaref]

Jimmie,
The guys are trying to stress to you the difference between establishing INITIAL LGP and maintaining LGP. You are correct about the requirements to establish ILGP, but they are correct about what can be done while maintaining it. Your statement that turning around means that the defender is no longer in LGP is incorrect.

You are correct that LGP is not always required for the foul to be a PC foul. There are several times when the play does not involve a guarding situation, and in those cases LGP has nothing to do with the call. That is when a legal spot on the floor takes priority. You have that right.

Their is just a little fine tuning which needs to be done to either your understanding or your communicating of your thoughts in writing.