screening a player from the ball?

[Troward]

A1 attempts a shot that misses and rebounds off the floor inbounds and is heading out of bounds slow and high. A2 on the baseline is close enough to the ball to make a potential saving play. B1 jumps in front of A2 to cut him off from the ball.Both players are moving and there is a slight collision, but A1 is still able to try to side step arround B1 to make a play on the ball. However B2 slides with A2 (like he is boxing him out) preventing him from getting to the ball to try to make a save. I NO called the scenario. Team A coach is all over me for an illegal screen which planted the seed of doubt that there might be something illegal in this play. Any opinions?

[Edited by Troward on Dec 4th, 2002 at 01:53 PM]

[Lotto]

Originally posted by Troward
A1 attempts a shot that misses and rebounds off the floor inbounds and is heading out of bounds slow and high. A2 on the baseline is close enough to the ball to make a potential saving play. B1 jumps in front of A2 to cut him off from the ball.Both players are moving and there is a slight collision, but A1 is still able to try to side step arround B2 to make a play on the ball. However B2 slides with A2 (like he is boxing him out) preventing him from getting to the ball to try to make a save. I NO called the scenario. Team A coach is all over me for an illegal screen which planted the seed of doubt that there might be something illegal in this play. Any opinions?

I think that B1 changed into B2 in your description...

I'd have to see it to decide if I were going to make a call. For example, did A1 get a shoulder around B2 before he/she slid over to "box out"? If so, B2 would bear the responsibility for the contact. Or did B2 get to the spot first, before A1 made the move to try to get around him/her? In that case, the responsibility belongs to A1.

Once you decide who is responsible for the contact, then you have to decide whether there is an advantage/disadvantage caused by the contact. It seems clear to me that this is much more likely if it is B2 who is responsible for the contact.

As a follow-up to this, I have always wondered what rule allows a player to move back and forth while boxing out an opponent. Why isn't this considered to be a moving screen?

[Troward]

thanks for correcting my schitzophrenic B1. I will try to edit this so it reads all the same defender B1.

Lotto are you saying you would call a foul on the defense for illegally moving to gain an advantage?
I don't think you can call an illegal screen on the defense?

in this scenario it is not the contact that provides an advantage to the defense because A1 avoids signicant contact and is able to continue moving towards the ball.It is the defender moving with A1 and preventing A1 from getting to the ball that is giving the defense the advantage. But I feel this is good defense. Are you saying you would call a foul on the defense for illegally moving and gaining an advantage?

[Hawks Coach]

To have a foul, there must be illegal contact. With moving players that come into contact, you must determine if the contact is incidental or illegal contact, who is to blame if it is illegal, whether the contact resulted in an unfair advantage to the person who initiated the illegal contact, etc.

With no contact, they can move to their hearts content, on screens or anything else. They can move in such a way that if another player came into contact with them, they could be found to have committed a foul. But there is no illegal advantage gained by motion without contact.

[DownTownTonyBrown]

If B1 keeps A2 behind him the play is legal (same as a rebounding boxout). If A2 has made his way around B1 (head and shoulders) and now B1 initiates contact preventing A2 from reaching the ball or let's say now B1 initiates contact that pushes A2 out-of-bounds... now we have decisions to make.

You now have the makings of a foul call. I would probably take into account whether A2 could have gotten the ball. If yes, then probably would have called the foul.

If A2 could have gotten the ball, then likey B1 from his better position could have gotten it first, so unless there is some ugly contact I'm probably gonna do the no foul and give the ball to B1 OOB.

[rockyroad]

Sounds like a coach who thinks he knows the rules, but really doesn't have a clue...it also sounds like pretty good defense to me...how is this any different that the defender staying between a cutting offensive player and the passer (without causing any significant contact) - the result is the same, the offensive player can't get the ball...wouldn't call a foul there...

Hey, maybe you should write this website down on a card, give it to that coach next time you see him, and then he can become better educated on the rules also!!

And, actually, the defender doesn't even have to keep the offensive player "behind" him in this situation...he could very well be facing the offensive player and stay between him and the ball wothout committing a foul...

[DownTownTonyBrown]

The direction the players are facing has no bearing.... just had this vision of boxing out.

[JugglingReferee]

I think this type of play does not called near enough.

I think we have to protect the player who is making a play at the ball. In this case, the player, as you described, has the potential to make a saving play. If his path to the ball is determined and an opposing player makes contact without obtaining legal guarding position and/or establishing his position of verticality, then we have a foul.

I think that too many times contact similar to a hockey "interference" penalty occurs and we do not call a foul.

Mike

Originally posted by Troward
A1 attempts a shot that misses and rebounds off the floor inbounds and is heading out of bounds slow and high. A2 on the baseline is close enough to the ball to make a potential saving play. B1 jumps in front of A2 to cut him off from the ball.Both players are moving and there is a slight collision, but A1 is still able to try to side step arround B1 to make a play on the ball. However B2 slides with A2 (like he is boxing him out) preventing him from getting to the ball to try to make a save. I NO called the scenario. Team A coach is all over me for an illegal screen which planted the seed of doubt that there might be something illegal in this play. Any opinions?

[Edited by Troward on Dec 4th, 2002 at 01:53 PM]

[rainmaker]

Originally posted by Troward
Lotto are you saying you would call a foul on the defense for illegally moving to gain an advantage?
I don't think you can call an illegal screen on the defense?

in this scenario it is not the contact that provides an advantage to the defense because A1 avoids signicant contact and is able to continue moving towards the ball.It is the defender moving with A1 and preventing A1 from getting to the ball that is giving the defense the advantage. But I feel this is good defense. Are you saying you would call a foul on the defense for illegally moving and gaining an advantage?

Of course you can call an illegal screen on defense!! Why not??

If there is no significant contact, there's no foul. Significant here doesn't mean large, it means contact that matters.

If, as you say, the advantage is gained by B1 being in the right place at the right time, rather than by contact, there's no foul. The play is completely legal.

[ChuckElias]

Good call, Juulie!

[A Pennsylvania Coach]

Had this exact sitch in our game last night. Opposing player screens off our player, ball takes one more high bounce, just inbounds apparently, so still no whistle. My wily senior who is trying to get around, starts to get around the shoulder, the opponent bumps her off, and my senior goes to the floor (bump was maybe 75% of the reason for the fall, I'm guessing she embellished just a bit). Finally ball hits OB and whistle for violation.

Comment from the stands: "It's not soccer, she can't do that!" My thoughts exactly. But whether it is a foul in each situation is a HTBT.