2011 NCAAM Sweet 16

[APG]

Well I had illegal screen on the play but some argued against the call.

[CLH]

#11 is not trying to screen, he's passing the ball and gets hit by a defender. If there is anything on this play its a defensive foul on #54.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by CLH

#11 is not trying to screen, he's passing the ball and gets hit by a defender. If there is anything on this play its a defensive foul on #54.

Just because he had the ball doesn't mean he wasn't trying to set a screen.

[JugglingReferee]

I do not have a foul, but that's after seeing the play in slow-motion replay.

In real time, I can see if one, me included, were to call this a foul.

Just one fact first: the contact occurred when the ball was out of A1's hands.

What I see is two players moving along their chosen paths. The offensive player's path is created first when he moves parallel to the end line. (He happens to be facing away from the basket - but the direction he faces doesn't matter.) After A1's path is established, defensive player B1 begins his path. They collide because the chosen paths of the two players intersect.

Since the offensive player established his path first, the onus is on the defensive player to avoid illegal contact.

The million dollar question is:

Does a player giving up player possession need to give time and distance if said player is committed to an established path? I say "no".

[JRutledge]

It does look like he threw his body into the defender to shield the pass attempt.

Not sure I would have called anything at first glance, but it appears to be the right call.

Peace

[grunewar]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

It does look like he threw his body into the defender to shield the pass attempt.

Not sure I would have called anything at first glance, but it appears to be the right call.

Peace

+1

I'll take this side.

I'm not sure how you call a block. What real advantage was gained by the defense?

Now, an illegal screen foul or just a foul? The contact definitely freed up the offensive player to take an unopposed shot.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by grunewar

+1

I'll take this side.

I'm not sure how you call a block. What real advantage was gained by the defense?

Now, an illegal screen foul or just a foul? The contact definitely freed up the offensive player to take an unopposed shot.

Does it matter? If he is trying to prevent the actions or affects the movements of the opponent, what we call it is not relevant in the bigger picture.

Am I alone in that thinking?

Peace

[Adam]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

It does look like he threw his body into the defender to shield the pass attempt.

Not sure I would have called anything at first glance, but it appears to be the right call.

Peace

The way I see the replay, he throws the pass and immediately realizes the defender has a clear path. He throws himself into that defender to clog up the path.

Great call from the C.

[Judtech]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

The way I see the replay, he throws the pass and immediately realizes the defender has a clear path. He throws himself into that defender to clog up the path.

Great call from the C.

I think it was a great play. Other terms used would be "crafty" "Cagey" "Grizzled Veteran move".
Foul. Sure. But I bet 9 times out of 10 you'd get away with it.
(I can neither confirm nor deny actually participating in such a manner)

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Judtech

I think it was a great play. Other terms used would be "crafty" "Cagey" "Grizzled Veteran move".
Foul. Sure. But I bet 9 times out of 10 you'd get away with it.
(I can neither confirm nor deny actually participating in such a manner)

Agreed on all counts. I drew three fouls one game, as a point guard, by purposefully crossing feet with my defender as we ran down the court. It was too easy.

[tomegun]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

It does look like he threw his body into the defender to shield the pass attempt.

Not sure I would have called anything at first glance, but it appears to be the right call.

Peace

Agreed and similar to what BNR said, I could do something like this easily and purposely on the court.

I know Jones prides himself on being a play caller and he also emphasizes body contact like he called on this play.

[stiffler3492]

I've got nothing on the Wisconsin play. I see Taylor changing his path, but not to get in the way of Howard. I see him changing paths to pass off to his teammate.

What's the NCAA rule about airborne players?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by stiffler3492

I've got nothing on the Wisconsin play. I see Taylor changing his path, but not to get in the way of Howard. I see him changing paths to pass off to his teammate.

What's the NCAA rule about airborne players?

What does it matter "why" he changed is path? By doing so, he illegally impeded the path of his opponent. His intent is irrelevant on this play.

[CLH]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Just because he had the ball doesn't mean he wasn't trying to set a screen.

I'm not sure I said having the ball means you cannot screen. What I did say is he's making a pass and not screening, therefore this is not an illegal screen and a no-call would probably be the best decision, but if call a foul you must, defensive foul would be more appropriate than an illegal screen.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by CLH

I'm not sure I said having the ball means you cannot screen. What I did say is he's making a pass and not screening, therefore this is not an illegal screen and a no-call would probably be the best decision, but if call a foul you must, defensive foul would be more appropriate than an illegal screen.

Looks to me that he was passing the ball and setting a screen. I was an expert at setting screens in the high post while dropping the ball off to a cutting guard.