Not if done properly.

THe way some coaches teach it, yes. And that's part of the reason we get those strange looks when we call the fouls.

[/B][/QUOTE]

I agree (somewhat). But when players maintain their position, don't they:
2. Extend shoulders, hips, knees or extend the arms or elbows fully or partially in a position other than vertical, so that the opponent’s freedom of movement is hindered when contact with the arms or elbows occurs.?

Hawks Coach, what's your take?

No, they don't. Your question and answer are a contradiction. They can't maintain their position AND do the things described in #2.

That's why fouls are called, and that's why coaches yell because many think that they can do those things.

I beg to differ. I don't see too many players who maintain their position without getting low and wide then extending their arms fully or partially.

Wizard
Typical rebounding blockout position. Yes they extend their arms, elbows, etc - a bit - if hands are down, they will be just outside the knees. Hips are down and back a bit, but not excessively or abnormally so. Feet are probably slightly more than shoulder width, but that is really true with most athletic stances - again, not exceptionally so. Remember - you have to be balanced to block out well.

Now here is the key. The players cannot extend arms to block out. The arms are extended to maintain balance, not to impede an opponent's normal movements. The back of their hips engages the opponent, and they need to move their feet to maintain position as the player attempts to move around them. If they use their arms to keep from getting beat (extending them backwards or to the side), it should be a foul. If they extend anything into the path of the player that is beating them to hinder that player (leg, foot, arm, elbow, hip), it should be a foul. Of course, the important thing to judge is how much contact is too much contact when it comes to the arms, but it is usually obvious when a player is not moving the feet and is solely using the arms to impede movement. The arms will always slightly impede motion, but should not be the primary means of blocking out.

This is how I read the rule and see it enforced in games. Seems fair to me.

HC,
I am not in total disagreement with you but when it is stated...

"a player may not extend shoulders, hips, knees or extend the arms or elbows fully or partially in a position other than vertical,"

Then extending their arms, elbows, etc - a bit - if hands are down, they will be just outside the knees, is a no-no.

You can extend your hands anywhere you want, anytime you want. Just don't make illegal contact when doing so. The reason the rule is stated as such is to make clear that if you put your hands, arms, elbows, etc., out there, you don't own that space in addition to the space over your feet. There is no violation nor penalty listed for extending hands illegally - just for making illegal contact when doing so.

If you move your feet and maintain the block out with your hips, you will be fine regardless of where any part of the rest of your body is because you aren't making contact with any other part of your body. If you don't move your feet, and your arms in their extended postion become all that you contact the oppontnet with, the contact will be deemed illegal if it gives you an advantage (i.e., hinders the opponent from making normal movements). If you make contact but gain no illegal advantage, play on because the your opponent just went around you for a rebound.

This is well said.

So Coach, when are you taking the FED test, hmmmmm? Thumbs up, man.

Coach,
Thanks for the clarification. But if that's what the rule means, then why isn't it stated that way? Then again, if the rules book wasn't written the way it is, we wouldn't have this wonderful forum to discuss how the game is played, coached and officiated.

Wizard
I think the rule is quite clear - you just quoted the first line of it. The rule states (with my emphasis):

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.

Bend his/her body in an abnormal position to hold or displace an opponent.

No displacement, no holding, no hindering = no foul.

Coach,
Well said and thanks for insight.

I feel almost immoral for asking a question about hooking twice; but NFHS Points of Emphasis for 2003 includes the following:

"Hooking" by the offensive players should be presumed a definite advantage. This is not a judgment call or tactic worthy of a warning. It is a foul and should be called without hesitation."

I have not been officiating long and therefore I may be missing it, but I see no reference to "hooking" in the rules book. And, I see no NFHS signal to indicate "hooking".

I assume "hooking" is a move by the offensive player with the ball, in which he or she pivots by a defensive player in such a way as to effectively hold the defensive player.

I understand hooking to mean using the arm to hook an opponent when going around them. I read your post to refer to using the leg when pivoting past an opponent. But NFHS has used a street term without defining it in the rules.