Consider the two scenarios with the following question in mind: What <b>in the rule book</b> differentiates them? Why isn't the second one a moving screen according to the definitions given in Rule 4?

(1) A1 is dribbling, B1 defending. A2 sets a screen in B1's visual field. B1 moves with the intent to go around A2. A2 moves sideways into B1's path. Contact occurs with B1 hitting squarely into A1's torso.

Call: Moving screen, blocking foul on A1.

(2) A2 now is rebounding a shot. B1 is behind A2. B1 moves with the intent to go around A2. A2 moves sideways into B1's path. Contact occurs with B1 hitting squarely into A1's torso.

Call: Pushing foul on B1.

First of all, in (1), the foul is not due to a moving screen; it's due to an illegal screen. I know that sounds picky, but it can be perfectly legal to screen an opponent while moving. There's nothing inherently illegal in a moving screen. The problem comes when there is contact and the screener has not met the criteria for legal screens.

Second of all, I'm not really sure what you're asking, Lotto. Are you saying that (2) should be considered an illegal screen by A2 b/c he moved into B2's path?

I'm sorry if I'm a little slow this morning.

Chuck

Actually, moving screens <b>are</b> illegal by rule:

Rule 10, Section 20.

Art. 4. No player shall set a screen while moving.

What I'm asking is what part of the <b>text of the rules</b> tells us that boxing out isn't an illegal screen (because the screener is moving).

To anticipate a possible question, boxing out does seem like a screen:

Rule 4, Section 56. Screen

Art. 1. A screen is legal action by a player who, without causing contact, delays or prevents an opponent from reaching a desired position.

No worries---I'm slow every morning!

Possible point of confusion: I'm referring to NCAA rules, not NF.

Blocking out
 

Does the rule book distinguish between screens and rebounds - in short, yes. Look in your book, or read below.

4-36: Rebounding
<i>Rebounding is an attempt by any player to secure possession of the ball following a try or tap for goal. In a rebounding situation there is no player or team control. </i>
ART. 2 . . . To obtain or maintain legal rebounding position, a player may not:
a. Displace, charge or push an opponent.
b. Extend shoulders, hips, knees or extend the arms or elbows fully or partially in a position other than vertical so that the freedom of movement of an opponent is hindered when contact with the arms or elbows occurs.
c. Bend his/her body in an abnormal position to hold or displace an opponent.
d. Violate the principle of verticality.
ART. 3 . . . <i>Every player is entitled to a spot on the floor, provided such player gets there first without illegally contacting an opponent. </i>

4-39
ART. 1 . . . <i>A screen is legal action by a player who, without causing contact, delays or prevents an opponent from reaching a desired position.</I>
ART. 2 . . . To establish a legal screening position:
a. The screener may face any direction.
b. Time and distance are relevant.
c. <i>The screener must be stationary</i>, except when both are moving in the same path and the same direction.

Clearly, the definition for rebounding works under a different set of standards than screening. Screening specifically says you must be stationary, rebounding does not - you can move to stay in front of someone on a rebound, you just can't dislodge them from a position that they legally hold.

Also, I would say that refs tend to use the rebound rules on a ball going OOB. It makes sense to apply those guielines, because the player being impeded is attempting to get to the ball (as in a rebound), rather than to a player they are guarding or a spot on the floor (as in a screen). It is not clear that this is the way the rules are written, but I like that interpretation myself. It seems the most logical application of the rules as written.

Re: Blocking out
 

Hmmm...I hadn't looked at the definition of rebounding with regard this (admittedly theoretical) question. Good catch, coach! I'll read that over a few times and see what I can gather from it.

Anyone else want to weigh in on this?

We've been playing this game quite a long time. When something seems to be allowed by the best officials, you can usually find a reason for it in the rules if you look long enough, I have found. The more I have studied that book, the more impressed I am with how the rules reflect how a good game should be played and called.

You're right. I had assumed that you were talking Fed. The pertinent rules in Fed are 4-39-2c and 4-39-6. It states there specifically how moving screens may be legal.

That seems like a good point, Lotto, but it's really not as clear cut as that, even in the NCAA rulebook. You list article 4, but you don't mention article 5:

"When both opponents are moving in exactly the same path and direction and the screener slows down or stops and contact results, the trailing player shall be responsible for such contact."

So both players are moving, and one of them is specifically called the "screener", and contact results and the foul is on the trailing player, not the screener. So it would seem that his moving screen is entirely legal.

Maybe the language of article 4 needs to be cleaned up a little, or the word "screener" needs to be removed from article 5.

I'm not trying to pick a fight, Lotto, honest. I'm just trying to get the wording right. I am not trying to be nit-picker.

Chuck

I <b>completely</b> agree with this---in fact, it is this principle that motivated my original post. This just one of those things that I've been looking for in the rules for a while and haven't been able to find...

You're right...this does seem to allow moving screens in certain circumstances. However, this part of the rule seems to cover a situation where one player is following another. In a boxing out situation, the players aren't moving in exactly the same path---they're moving in different, parallel paths.


This is a nit-picky kind of question, so feel free to pick as many of those nits as you can find!!!