Multiple players on offense form "wall" to screen for shooter?
 

***Sitch.1***

AAAA 8th grade boys. (NHFS with some youth mods.)

Team A is inbounding in FC from baseline. They line up 3 of their players shoulder-to-shoulder (even wrap their arms around each-others waists) about 1ft inside of the 3pt arc. Team A then inbounds the ball to a cutter going behind the "wall" who then attempts a 3pt shot.

Legal?

Similar enough to the above question:
***Sitch.2***

6th grade girls. Rec-ball (still learning to walk and chew gum stage :> )

A1 enters FC and begins drive while guarded by B1.

Now this is where it gets interesting....
ALL 3 of A2,A3, and A4 come up and set a screen on B1 in what I can only describe as a triangle formation AROUND B1. (Man defense only in their league, no backcourt guarding allowed etc... again walk/chew gum).

Unable to cite any rule/case for why this MUST be illegal I explained to Coach-A that her tactics seemed to take away from the purpose of their league which is to teach fundamentals and help players improve.

Thoughts or actual rule/case(s) we could apply to either of these situations?

Sit. 1

It could be a team technical foul if it restricted an opponent's movement. If a player attemps to come out and contest the shot, then I'd call it.
10-1
A team shall not:
Art. 10... Allow players to lock arms or grasp a teammate(s) in an effort to restrict the movement of an opponent.


Sit. 2

Um...I'd have nothing...just 3 screens set around an opponent. As long as they don't interlock, time and distance requirements are met, and the players are in a legal screening position, then play on.

Thanks for the help getting thread/posts going and for the welcome.

In sit2 the 3 A-screeners actually "surrounded" B1, all facing inward towards her and subsequently preventing any escape route for B1. Thus effectively locking her down to one spot on the floor, B1 would have to foul her way out of this, or stand there till play is over.

I would think 10-1 ART.10 would apply to sit2 also "restrict the movement of opponent" ?

No problem! Glad I could help.

10-1-10 specifically says a team shall not lock arms or grasp each other in an effort to restrict an opponent. As long as they're in a legal screening position, are not grasping or locking arms, and give the proper time and distance, I see nothing wrong here. Granted it's not smart offense as there will be no spacing and you're making things easier on the defense.

Also remember this is strictly NFHS rules. I noticed you said you have some modifications for your league. I would check with your assignor.

Interesting.

Yeah, no advantage nor something I think we will ever see at AAAA or HS level, but a rare case of "can't yet walk/chew gum-league" coaching genius. Due to their No BC/zone/trap/double team defense rules, strictly man2man, this really put Team B at a disadvantage as all 3 defenders had to stick to the A-screeners while A1 just slid around the whole mess for lay-up attempts.

Lol, Now I kinda feel like a heel for telling their coach it was questionable.

Does the league not allow switching? Otherwise all a player would have to go is get a solid screen and it'd become a lay-up drill.

Again keeping in mind these are the "newest of the newest" players to the sport, most have never played before. So unlike some 6th grade girls games that can be as heated and talent filled as any JV game, these kids are... s-l-o-w.

Im talking often diligently guarding their girl man2man, even when they are now on offense. Lol.

While they don't allow anything other than man-D, they allow for help defense ONLY after the ball carrier has entered the lane, or after a completed pass to a player in the lane.

(The surrounding screen in sitch2 created enough chaos for these girls that it was equal to the "Barking-Dog Play" replayed on national TV years ago.)

By the time the ball enters the lane and they can leave their man to help its often too late, layup.

If the players didn't interlock arms, it's nothing unless the league has something against it.

Note that the rule you quoted says that it's a T if the action is in AN EFFORT to restrict movement. Actual restriction isn't needed.

Like the "T for flopping", I'd try to talk them out of the action first -- especially at this level.