Call? or no call?

[fullor30]

Originally Posted by bbcoach7

I just wanted to clarify. We practice this, but I didn't know if it would work, or if it's legal. In this example, my team would be Team B. So yes, if executed properly and the correct call was made, my team would be shooting free throws according to your response.

Incidentally, while I've never seen it ran, the coach who taught this tactic to me has tried it once. The referee blew his whistle on the contact. He then declared an inadverdant whistle, reset the clock, and set it up again.

Now in this instance... the inbounds passer cannot run the end line now, correct?

Incorrect. the ball was never inbounded. A still may run the endline.

[Juulie Downs]

To answer the question the OP intended to ask, yes the play is legal. I might very well no-call the contact, especially if the screener wasn't displaced. The purpose of the screen is to give the thrower space to get the ball in, and if that purpose is met, then the screener hasn't been disadvantaged. Defender has hurt only himself, and whatever advantage has been gained by the B team (legal advantage), might be taken away if a whistle is blown.

I'm not saying I'm sure that's how I'd call it, just looking at possibilities.

[APG]

I think I remember a player similar to this happening in an NCAA game a couple of years ago. The crew went with a no call, and if I remember correctly, decision on here tended to agree with the no call.

[Adam]

The applicable rule here is 4-27-4
"A player who is screened within his/her visual field is expected to avoid contact with the screener by stopping or going around the screener. In cases of screens outside the visual field, the opponent may make inadvertent contact with the screener, and such contact is to be ruled incidental contact, provided the screener is not displaced if he/she has the ball."

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by bbcoach7

Both teams are in double bonus. Team A has just scored to take a 1 point lead with 7 seconds left on the clock. B1 grabs ball out of the net and steps out of bounds to throw in, and is immediately being guarded at the end line by A1. B2 runs up to the baseline and sets a legal screen along the endline. B1 runs the baseline toward B2's screen, and A1 runs straight into B2's screen knocking B2 over, and it's clearly not a "flop." A1 had 3 steps before impact. Is this an defensive foul?

Just to be clear, this is hypothetical, I've not seen it done, but we have practiced it a couple times in case we ever have an opportunity to try it.

You might wish to check out this thread from last March.

Short of time? Draw a foul!

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by bbcoach7

Both teams are in double bonus. Team A has just scored to take a 1 point lead with 7 seconds left on the clock. B1 grabs ball out of the net and steps out of bounds to throw in, and is immediately being guarded at the end line by A1. B2 runs up to the baseline and sets a legal screen along the endline. B1 runs the baseline toward B2's screen, and A1 runs straight into B2's screen knocking B2 over, and it's clearly not a "flop." A1 had 3 steps before impact. Is this an defensive foul?

Just to be clear, this is hypothetical, I've not seen it done, but we have practiced it a couple times in case we ever have an opportunity to try it.

>>edited to change my question to is this a defensive foul?<<

This is too early in the morning for this nonsense but here goes.

My first question to you, BBCoach is this: Did A1 stop immediately upon making contact with B2? If A1 did stop immediately then no foul has occured; B2's screen accomplished its objective. If A1 ran through B2 then A1 has committed a personal foul for pushing A1 and unless there was some action by A1 that would cause the official to think otherwise is a common foul and A1 shoots two free throws.

MTD, Sr.

[grunewar]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

My first question to you, BBCoach is this: Did A1 stop immediately upon making contact with B2? If A1 did stop immediately then no foul has occured; B2's screen accomplished its objective. If A1 ran through B2 then A1 has committed a personal foul for pushing B2 and unless there was some action by A1 that would cause the official to think otherwise is a common foul and B2 shoots two free throws.

MTD, Sr.

Fixed it for you, I think (it's early for me here too).

[CMHCoachNRef]

Originally Posted by representing

Yes, he/she can still run the baseline.

representing,
You are showing your "ignorance" to fellow referees, I mean officials. On this officiating forum, please refer to the lines at the end of the court as endlines. In this instance, since you were not speaking to an official, but rather a coach, he likely still understood since he is, as a coach, equally "ignorant."

Coach,
I have used the play you describe several times. It has only worked once -- all other times, we had to have a "Plan B" in order to get an opportunity to score. Sometimes incorporating the screener as the second inbounder can be effecive in relieving the on-ball pressure while using the former inbounder as the receiver -- depending upon the press being employed by the opposition. The more you know.....

[CMHCoachNRef]

Originally Posted by Juulie Downs

To answer the question the OP intended to ask, yes the play is legal. I might very well no-call the contact, especially if the screener wasn't displaced. The purpose of the screen is to give the thrower space to get the ball in, and if that purpose is met, then the screener hasn't been disadvantaged. Defender has hurt only himself, and whatever advantage has been gained by the B team (legal advantage), might be taken away if a whistle is blown.

I'm not saying I'm sure that's how I'd call it, just looking at possibilities.

Juulie,
Quite honestly, THE MAJOR PURPOSE of running such a play IS TO DRAW FOUL caused by the contact. While I understand your view (and it is a good thought in nearly all cases), in this case, as a COACH, I really WANT (and NEED) you to call the foul so we can shoot free throws (I probably have my best FTer setting the screen).

The play is completely legal. An officiating crew should call this foul if warranted -- proper time/distance and there was enough contact to warrant a foul (would the foul have been called on the offensive end for any other "on ball" screen?).

[Smitty]

Originally Posted by CMHCoachNRef

The play is completely legal. An officiating crew should call this foul if warranted -- proper time/distance and there was enough contact to warrant a foul (would the foul have been called on the offensive end for any other "on ball" screen?).

It's hardly an automatic foul. If the screen is blind, in my view, and your screener gets knocked over, we play on.

[CMHCoachNRef]

Originally Posted by Smitty

It's hardly an automatic foul. If the screen is blind, in my view, and your screener gets knocked over, we play on.

Originally Posted by CMHCoachNRef

The play is completely legal. An officiating crew should call this foul if warranted -- proper time/distance and there was enough contact to warrant a foul (would the foul have been called on the offensive end for any other "on ball" screen?).

Smitty,
Please take the time to read my post. I think it is pretty clear.

[Smitty]

Originally Posted by CMHCoachNRef

Smitty,
Please take the time to read my post. I think it is pretty clear.

Your post didn't say anything about whether the screen was blind or not. That's pretty significant in determining whether the contact, even if severe, is legal or not.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by CMHCoachNRef

Juulie,
Quite honestly, THE MAJOR PURPOSE of running such a play IS TO DRAW FOUL caused by the contact. While I understand your view (and it is a good thought in nearly all cases), in this case, as a COACH, I really WANT (and NEED) you to call the foul so we can shoot free throws (I probably have my best FTer setting the screen).

The play is completely legal. An officiating crew should call this foul if warranted -- proper time/distance and there was enough contact to warrant a foul (would the foul have been called on the offensive end for any other "on ball" screen?).

Coach, I don't care if that's your purpose; it's not a valid purpose, IMO. It's like the shooter who twists his body and jumps into a defender for the purpose of drawing a foul. I'm not giving him a foul simply because he wanted one.

A foul is determined by two things:
1. Who is responsible for the contact?
2. Was the non-responsible player put at a disadvantage?

In the OP, contact can be pretty severe and still not be illegal (assuming the screen was outside the visual field of the defender.) IOW, your screener can end up on the floor with a big bruise and a no-call could still be correct; depending on whether the defender attempted to stop upon contact.

[CMHCoachNRef]

Originally Posted by Smitty

Your post didn't say anything about whether the screen was blind or not. That's pretty significant in determining whether the contact, even if severe, is legal or not.

Shaqs and Smitty,
So, once again, are you going to have a "train wreck" NO CALL if the point guard comes across half court, the ball side post steps up to the top of the key, the post then PLANTS BOTH FEET, the point guard (with defender within several feet) takes FOUR STEPS while dribbling toward the screener, the defender CRASHES INTO the screener because NO DEFENDER told the point guard's defender that the screen was coming, you are going to make NO CALL because the screen was blind??? Time and distance requirements for a legal screen are NOT infinite.

The inbounds play is NO DIFFERENT! If the screener is set and gives sufficient time and distance for the defender to be aware and change course, it is a FOUL on the DEFENDER!!! It is NOT a NO CALL simply because the defender took four steps without looking where he was going....

Or do I just have a misunderstanding of a legal screen?

[Smitty]

Originally Posted by CMHCoachNRef

Shaqs and Smitty,
So, once again, are you going to have a "train wreck" NO CALL if the point guard comes across half court, the ball side post steps up to the top of the key, the post then PLANTS BOTH FEET, the point guard (with defender within several feet) takes FOUR STEPS while dribbling toward the screener, the defender CRASHES INTO the screener because NO DEFENDER told the point guard's defender that the screen was coming, you are going to make NO CALL because the screen was blind??? Time and distance requirements for a legal screen are NOT infinite.

The inbounds play is NO DIFFERENT! If the screener is set and gives sufficient time and distance for the defender to be aware and change course, it is a FOUL on the DEFENDER!!! It is NOT a NO CALL simply because the defender took four steps without looking where he was going....

Or do I just have a misunderstanding of a legal screen?

Most likely that will absolutely be a no call. And yes, I believe you have a misunderstanding of a legal screen.