Illegal screen or good offense
 

I have had this come up a number of times and can't seem to find the rule to address the situation.

basically a player with the ball is dribbling and another offenseive player gets in the way of the defense while moving but not while attempting to screen for nis team.

I have seen this happen when a player brings the ball up and dribble past a slower movnig teammate. If the defender forces the issue and runs into the ball handlers teammate, is it a foul?

Also on the fast break where a teammate is runnnig with him but the defender is trying to on the other side of that teammate and is blocked from takinig the shortest path to the man with the ball. (yes he runs into him while trying to get there, this is all while on the fast break)

Thoughts on what rules apply and the right call?

Thanks,

Greg J

Have you read the rule on screening about players moving in the same path and direction?

I have seen this:
To screen a moving opponent, the player must stop soon enough to permit his opponent to stop or change direction. The distance between the player screening and his opponent will depend upon the speed at which the players are moving.

If two opponents are moving in the same direction and path, the player who is behind is responsible for contact. The player in front may stop or slow his pace, but he may not move backward or sidewards into his opponent. The player in front may or may not have the ball. This situation assumes the two players have been moving in identically the same direction and path before contact.

But it still not obvious to me what rights the offensive player has when executing an offensive cut and not intentionally screening to get in the defenders way.

Basically the rule you just quoted says if, in the situation you are describing, there's contact from behind on an off ball A player by a B player guarding the ball, the A player is not at fault so long as he is not moving backward or sideways. ie If there is a foul, it's on B. Most often I would say this is a no call.

Interesting. So it seems like the flynig V formation (from the might Ducks :) with a V of teammates blocking for the ball handler would be legal as long as they are moving forward in a straight lin, but not backwards or sideways?

Seems to me more like if the dribbler is moving in such a way that he uses his moving (forward and in a straight line) teammate as a screen and the defender runs into him then the foul would have to be on the offensive player.

If the team locked arms and tried to do this, then they'd be issued a team technical foul. If they weren't locking arms, all a defender would have to do is get in front of one of the "screeners" and take a charge.

What the rule says is that it is legal for a player to be moving while screening if the screener and defender are moving in the same direction. Now you see this play typically happen in a full court pressure situation where the screener is walking upcourt with the dribbler.

The rule also tells us that if there is contact, that the person from behind is responsible for the contact provided he doesn't move sideways or backwards into the trailing player. Think a fastbreak situation where a teammate tries to count off a potential defender to make a lay-up attempt easier.

His intent doesn't matter; it's the actions that do. Whether he's intending to or not, he's setting a screen when he impedes the opponent's progress and must do so legally.

I don't think it's as easy as that.

A1 runs "this way" to try to get open for a pass.

B1 runs "that way" to try to guard A2. They collide, preventing B1 from defending. Illegal?

On the pick-and-roll-and-screen play, I do look for (almost) any action (hestitation, arms out, etc.) by the roller that indicates something other than a roll. If I see it, I'm much more likely to call the foul. But, if it's just the roll, then I think it falls under the "when 10 players are moving in a confined area, some contact is bouond to occur" rule (or whatever the specific wording is).

not being a smart A$$ here its called incidental contact lol = )

Read the entire rule, it's prefaced with wording very similar to what bob wrote.

im aware of that i was just being comical:D