2011 NCAAM Sweet 16

[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.

[stiffler3492]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

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.

What about the flipside...how is Howard totally innocent?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by stiffler3492

What about the flipside...how is Howard totally innocent?

Fair question. Howard sees an open player about to receive the ball and starts to head out to guard him. The question is, who gets the rights to the intersection of their paths?

Had the passer continued his dribble, the defender would have been charged, certainly. But he didn't, he passed, and his actions constituted a screen. Look at the results of the play, it's just like any other screen where the screener is late.

[stiffler3492]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Fair question. Howard sees an open player about to receive the ball and starts to head out to guard him. The question is, who gets the rights to the intersection of their paths?

Had the passer continued his dribble, the defender would have been charged, certainly. But he didn't, he passed, and his actions constituted a screen. Look at the results of the play, it's just like any other screen where the screener is late.

Ok, but how does the fact that Taylor is in the air change the equation? Isn't an airborne player entitled to land without obstruction?

[tref]

Originally Posted by stiffler3492

What's the NCAA rule about airborne players?

Originally Posted by stiffler3492

Ok, but how does the fact that Taylor is in the air change the equation? Isn't an airborne player entitled to land without obstruction?

Doesn't the "airborne" rule pertain to the shooter?

Other than that, isn't everyone entitled to a spot on the floor (exception is the secondary defender under the basket for NCAA-M)?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by stiffler3492

Ok, but how does the fact that Taylor is in the air change the equation? Isn't an airborne player entitled to land without obstruction?

I'm not any more positive he was in the air than I am that Howard was in the air. It's pretty close, to be honest. And a screener doesn't get to launch himself into the air here just to make an otherwise illegal screen legal.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by stiffler3492

Ok, but how does the fact that Taylor is in the air change the equation? Isn't an airborne player entitled to land without obstruction?

You have a conflict between two rules and have to decide which one to apply....which one is relevant to the situation.

If the guard had kept the ball, probably a foul on Howard. But, in passing it away, he became a screener and is subject to the screening rules. (Yes, I know the ball handler can also be a screener).

If being airborne absolved an offensive player of giving time/distance in setting a screen, ever screener would jump into the path of the defender.

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

You have a conflict between two rules and have to decide which one to apply....which one is relevant to the situation.

If the guard had kept the ball, definitely a foul on Howard. But, in passing it away, he became a screener and is subject to the screening rules. (Yes, I know the ball handler can also be a screener).

If being airborne absolved an offensive player of giving time/distance in setting a screen, ever screener would jump into the path of the defender.

I see A1 as being airborne as he released the ball. To me, he's allowed to land safely because his path was clear when he left the floor. Because his status changed from having PC to not having PC, while airborne, he is in fact absolved of time and distance until he lands.

[CLH]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

If the guard had kept the ball, probably a foul on Howard. But, in passing it away, he became a screener and is subject to the screening rules.

Where exactly can we find this in the rule/case books?

Are we to assume everytime a ball is passed, the passer is now automatically a screener? Where are you getting this?

[dbking]

RULE 4-35
Art. 5.

To establish legal guarding position on a player without the ball:

a. Time and distance shall be required to attain an initial legal position;

b. The guard shall give the opponent the time and distance to avoid contact;

Approved Ruling 109

c. The distance given by the opponent of the player without the ball need not be more than two strides; and

d. When the opponent is airborne, the guard shall have attained legal position before the opponent left the playing court.

This rule clearly defines that the foul is on Howard, not Taylor.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

If being airborne absolved an offensive player of giving time/distance in setting a screen, ever screener would jump into the path of the defender.

Yabut....

In this stuation you have a defender jumping into the path of an airborne player after that player became airborne. There was no one in the player's path imo when he did leave his feet.

In the grand scheme of things though, it's one "iffy" call that had no bearing at all on the game.

[APG]

Originally Posted by tref

Doesn't the "airborne" rule pertain to the shooter?

Other than that, isn't everyone entitled to a spot on the floor (exception is the secondary defender under the basket)?

Except one has to legally get in the path of an airborne player before the player is airborne...with or without the ball. The only thing that will change with regards to having the ball or not is time and distance. It's never legal to undercut an airborne player.

[tref]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

Except one has to legally get in the path of an airborne player before the player is airborne...with or without the ball. The only thing that will change with regards to having the ball or not is time and distance. It's never legal to undercut an airborne player.

No doubt!

[stiffler3492]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

Except one has to legally get in the path of an airborne player before the player is airborne...with or without the ball. The only thing that will change with regards to having the ball or not is time and distance. It's never legal to undercut an airborne player.

That's the point I'm trying to make here. If anything, it should be a foul on Howard. Obviously, if Howard were in that spot before Taylor took off, the impetus is on Taylor.

I still have nothing.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by stiffler3492

That's the point I'm trying to make here. If anything, it should be a foul on Howard. Obviously, if Howard were in that spot before Taylor took off, the impetus is on Taylor.

I still have nothing.

Let me ask you this:
A2, setting a screen on B1, sees B1 is going to go around the screen. Just as B1 gets close, A2 jumps airborne into the path of B1 causing a collision.

You calling B1?