block/charge by rule

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

While he can't gain LGP within the flight path of A1, he can certainly gain LGP one inch beyond that path.

The OP still hasn't cleared up whether B1 established LGP prior to A2 leaving the floor, or after.

Which is why I'm drawing out this conversation:

Originally Posted by splitveer

... while in the air A2 caught the ball with B1 gaining legal guarding position and before A2 landed he crashed into B1...

How did B1 gain LGP while A2 was airborne if A2 crashed into B1 before landing?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

How did B1 gain LGP while A2 was airborne if A2 crashed into B1 before landing?

I agree, which is why I asked the question initially. I'm basing the ambiguity on the fact that he was asking about time and distance.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

I agree, which is why I asked the question initially. I'm basing the ambiguity on the fact that he was asking about time and distance.

Agreed about "time and distance" not being a factor here.

But in this specific play we don't know for sure if defender has LGP until airborne player either crashes before landing or lands before crashing.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Which is why I'm drawing out this conversation:



How did B1 gain LGP while A2 was airborne if A2 crashed into B1 before landing?

In that specific example, he didn't.

That wasn't what I was responding to.

The thread also included comments about landing and then crashing, and you said it was impossible to establish LGP until landing. My response is specifically to that statement.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

In that specific example, he didn't.

That wasn't what I was responding to.

The thread also included comments about landing and then crashing, and you said it was impossible to establish LGP until landing. My response is specifically to that statement.

What B1 was doing while A2 is airborne is irrelevent. It's the fact that B1 had LGP when A2 landed that is relevent. That's basically my point.

The OP stated that B1 established LGP while A2 was airborne but that A2 crashed into B1 before landing. With all the back-and-forth, that very important snippet of the post was not addressed.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

What B1 was doing while A2 is airborne is irrelevent. It's the fact that B1 had LGP when A2 landed that is relevent. That's basically my point.

The OP stated that B1 established LGP while A2 was airborne but that A2 crashed into B1 before landing. With all the back-and-forth, that very important snippet of the post was not addressed.

Actually, the very first two responses in thread addressed it.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Actually, the very first two responses in thread addressed it.

I'm more prone to read msg #7.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

I'm more prone to read msg #7.

LMAO

I still haven't found out whether I was wrong, though.

[splitveer]

Thanks for all the thoughts. My big concern was with time and distance. I do know that if LGP was established before A2 left the floor then caught the ball it will be a charge. If A2 lands then crashes into B1 who has established LGP then it is also a charge. The key here is gaining LGP to enforce the block charge call. I didn't know if because A2 was in the air without the ball he had the same stipulations as in a time and distance situation with someone moving without the ball. My interpretation through this process and the rule book has led me to when A2 catches the ball he is now under the same rules as a player in control of the ball and time and distance are not required.