Pick and Roll Rule

[bainsey]

Originally Posted by just another ref

An illegal pivot can be traveling. Is this a problem for you?

Not at all. There's one key word that's in the definition of screen that's not in the definition of pivot. Check it out.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by bainsey

Not at all. There's one key word that's in the definition of screen that's not in the definition of pivot. Check it out.

Okay, check the definitions of block and charge. They contain the word illegal.
There is no legal block. There is no legal charge. They are merely fouls, and if they were legal, they wouldn't be fouls.

So, is a screen is illegal, by definition it is no longer a screen, but merely a foul.

You're right.

You win.

Next question:

So what?

[bainsey]

Originally Posted by just another ref

So what?

So, if we're so particular about using correct venecular in our avocation, we should flag this term-in-question, too, whether it's "accepted" or not. I'm sure there are others. I just happened to notice this one.

(Aside to Cam: No prob.)

[Adam]

Originally Posted by bainsey

So, if we're so particular about using correct venecular in our avocation, we should flag this term-in-question, too, whether it's "accepted" or not. I'm sure there are others. I just happened to notice this one.

(Aside to Cam: No prob.)

Look, put this in the category of "baseline," "in the key," "call timeout," etc. Technically incorrect terms that still get the point across and don't cause any undue heartaches except for the particularly anal semanticists amongst us.

[bainsey]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Look, put this in the category of "baseline," "in the key," "call timeout," etc.

Fine with me. I think that's a fair classification.

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

You need the change the "we're" above to "I'm".

I thought you were done discussing this. Anyway, very well. If the only point you have is, "it's perfectly okay, as long as everyone does it," then I'm not sure what else I can tell you. Personally, I believe officials should care more about what's right than what's popular.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by bainsey

If the only point you have is, "it's perfectly okay, as long as everyone does it," then I'm not sure what else I can tell you.

To be accurate, my point is that "it's perfectly OK as long as every other official but that guy does it.

Agree with "done discussing" part.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by bainsey

So, if we're so particular about using correct venecular in our avocation, we should flag this term-in-question, too, whether it's "accepted" or not. I'm sure there are others. I just happened to notice this one.

You need the change the "we're" above to "I'm". You seem to be about the only respondent so far to really give a damn. However, don't let that stop your never-ending quest for correct vernacular(as YOU see it), even if the regular ol' vernacular was, is and will still be commonly used by 103.4% of the rest of us.

ver-nac-u-lar- using plain everyday, ordinary language

In basketball officialspeak, the term "illegal screen" is our vernacular.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Okay, check the definitions of block and charge. They contain the word illegal.
There is no legal block. There is no legal charge. They are merely fouls, and if they were legal, they wouldn't be fouls.

So, is a screen is illegal, by definition it is no longer a screen, but merely a foul.

But there is a difference.

The offending player in a block/charge is not trying to commit/set a block/charge. The block/charge is all by itself the failure to do something properly...thus it is illegal by definition.

However, a screen is a legal act and the player trying to commit/set a screen is doing so on purpose (usually) and is only charged with a foul when they do so improperly...when it is not a legal screen....or is an illegal screen.