The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Fri Jan 27, 2012, 12:44pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: NE Ohio
Posts: 7,620
Quote:
Originally Posted by bainsey View Post
Isn't getting to the spot first only half the battle, though? What if you're not facing your opponent (4-23-2b)?
People insist on applying the guarding rule as the only way for a defender to "take a charge." If B1 has his back to A1 and A1 pushes him to the floor, you're calling a block on B1 because he didn't have LGP?

LGP offers protection to moving defenders. A stationary defender is entitled to his spot on the floor (and the vertical space above it) regardless of whether he has LGP.
__________________
Cheers,
mb
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Fri Jan 27, 2012, 12:49pm
Do not give a damn!!
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: On the border
Posts: 30,558
Quote:
Originally Posted by mbyron View Post
People insist on applying the guarding rule as the only way for a defender to "take a charge." If B1 has his back to A1 and A1 pushes him to the floor, you're calling a block on B1 because he didn't have LGP?

LGP offers protection to moving defenders. A stationary defender is entitled to his spot on the floor (and the vertical space above it) regardless of whether he has LGP.
This is spot on with my thinking of the rule.

Peace
__________________
Let us get into "Good Trouble."
-----------------------------------------------------------
Charles Michael “Mick” Chambers (1947-2010)
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Fri Jan 27, 2012, 11:56pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 346
Quote:
Originally Posted by JRutledge View Post
This is spot on with my thinking of the rule.
And me.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Fri Jan 27, 2012, 01:00pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 2,183
Quote:
Originally Posted by mbyron View Post
People insist on applying the guarding rule as the only way for a defender to "take a charge." If B1 has his back to A1 and A1 pushes him to the floor, you're calling a block on B1 because he didn't have LGP?

LGP offers protection to moving defenders. A stationary defender is entitled to his spot on the floor (and the vertical space above it) regardless of whether he has LGP.
Great explanation +1
__________________
I gotta new attitude!
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Fri Jan 27, 2012, 01:07pm
Esteemed Participant
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Vancouver, WA
Posts: 4,775
Quote:
Originally Posted by mbyron View Post
People insist on applying the guarding rule as the only way for a defender to "take a charge." If B1 has his back to A1 and A1 pushes him to the floor, you're calling a block on B1 because he didn't have LGP?

LGP offers protection to moving defenders. A stationary defender is entitled to his spot on the floor (and the vertical space above it) regardless of whether he has LGP.
Very well said.

And bainsey, doesn't rule 11-2-4 say that you can't combine self-imposed suspensions with injury recovery time? I think it's clear that they can't be served concurrently. (But I do hope your achilles heals quickly)
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Fri Jan 27, 2012, 01:10pm
Back from the DL
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Maine
Posts: 2,540
Quote:
Originally Posted by rockyroad View Post
And bainsey, doesn't rule 11-2-4 say that you can't combine self-imposed suspensions with injury recovery time?
Not by my interpretation.

Then again, considering my OP, take strong consideration of what that's worth.
__________________
Confidence is a vehicle, not a destination.
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Fri Jan 27, 2012, 02:43pm
Esteemed Participant
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Vancouver, WA
Posts: 4,775
Quote:
Originally Posted by bainsey View Post
Not by my interpretation.

Then again, considering my OP, take strong consideration of what that's worth.
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Fri Jan 27, 2012, 02:47pm
(Something hilarious)
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: These United States
Posts: 1,162
From the 07-08 NFHS Simp. & Ill. book

-talking about how the defensive player is entitled to their legal spot on the court, resulting in ruling this type of play a PC foul.Photobucket
__________________
I can't remember the last time I wasn't at least kind-of tired.
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Fri Jan 27, 2012, 07:34pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: In the offseason.
Posts: 12,263
Quote:
Originally Posted by mbyron View Post
P

LGP offers protection to moving defenders. A stationary defender is entitled to his spot on the floor (and the vertical space above it) regardless of whether he has LGP.
Actually, he/she isn't. He/She is only entitled to the space above if he/she has LGP.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com
Commissioner, Portland Basketball Officials Association
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Sat Jan 28, 2012, 12:13am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: NE Ohio
Posts: 7,620
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camron Rust View Post
Actually, he/she isn't. He/She is only entitled to the space above if he/she has LGP.
You're talking about jumping. I didn't mention jumping.
__________________
Cheers,
mb
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Sat Jan 28, 2012, 03:06am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: In the offseason.
Posts: 12,263
Quote:
Originally Posted by mbyron View Post
You're talking about jumping. I didn't mention jumping.
Nah, here is what you said...

Quote:
Originally Posted by mbyron View Post
A stationary defender is entitled to his spot on the floor (and the vertical space above it) regardless of whether he has LGP.
The verticality rule says that must have LGP to have the right to the space above them....whether by jumping or raising their arms.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com
Commissioner, Portland Basketball Officials Association
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old Sat Jan 28, 2012, 03:51am
Do not give a damn!!
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: On the border
Posts: 30,558
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camron Rust View Post
The verticality rule says that must have LGP to have the right to the space above them....whether by jumping or raising their arms.
How is that the case? Rebounding we do not require a player to have LGP to be legal on contact in other cases? Where does it say there must be LGP for verticality?

Peace
__________________
Let us get into "Good Trouble."
-----------------------------------------------------------
Charles Michael “Mick” Chambers (1947-2010)
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old Sat Jan 28, 2012, 05:21am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: In the offseason.
Posts: 12,263
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camron Rust View Post
The verticality rule says that must have LGP to have the right to the space above them....whether by jumping or raising their arms.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JRutledge View Post
How is that the case? Rebounding we do not require a player to have LGP to be legal on contact in other cases? Where does it say there must be LGP for verticality?

Peace
As I posted in post #16....Not facing the opponent
Rule 4-45 VERTICALITY
Verticality applies to a legal position. Following are the basic components of the principle of verticality:
ART. 1 . . . Legal guarding position must be obtained initially and movement thereafter must be legal.

I believe the difference is that it is not the same between defending/guarding and rebounding and that, in the case of rebounding, the initial requirements are not LGP but a legal rebounding position as established in 4-37...and it is not the same as LGP, it is much less restrictive.

The rights of verticality come into play only when the relevant legal position is obtained.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com
Commissioner, Portland Basketball Officials Association

Last edited by Camron Rust; Sat Jan 28, 2012 at 05:25am.
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old Sat Jan 28, 2012, 01:57pm
Do not give a damn!!
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: On the border
Posts: 30,558
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camron Rust View Post
As I posted in post #16....Not facing the opponent
Rule 4-45 VERTICALITY
Verticality applies to a legal position. Following are the basic components of the principle of verticality:
ART. 1 . . . Legal guarding position must be obtained initially and movement thereafter must be legal.

I believe the difference is that it is not the same between defending/guarding and rebounding and that, in the case of rebounding, the initial requirements are not LGP but a legal rebounding position as established in 4-37...and it is not the same as LGP, it is much less restrictive.

The rights of verticality come into play only when the relevant legal position is obtained.
I misspoke a little in my question. What I really meant to say was where does it say that all contact with a player involve all players to gain LGP? There are case plays and interpretations in the S&I books or pictures that show the NF wants a foul on players that run over players that are not facing them. I do not see any examples where someone is called for this just because they did not once face the player with the ball? And verticality is not just about someone jumping it is about staying in your vertical plane.

Peace
__________________
Let us get into "Good Trouble."
-----------------------------------------------------------
Charles Michael “Mick” Chambers (1947-2010)
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old Sat Jan 28, 2012, 04:16am
We don't rent pigs
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 7,627
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camron Rust View Post


The verticality rule says that must have LGP to have the right to the space above them....whether by jumping or raising their arms.
It also says: The player with the ball is to be given no more protection or consideration than the defender........
__________________
I swear, Gus, you'd argue with a possum.
It'd be easier than arguing with you, Woodrow.


Lonesome Dove
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Three for the opponent? bainsey Basketball 12 Wed Jan 25, 2012 01:08am
Batting the puck into the net off an opponent John Robertson Hockey 3 Sat Nov 04, 2006 03:08pm
RHP in stretch facing 1st base (balk or no balk) tem_blue Baseball 6 Thu Jul 20, 2006 10:00pm
Ejected Coach...first time facing since ejection Raymond Basketball 9 Wed Feb 08, 2006 01:34pm
Lining: "Facing the play" sir_eldren Hockey 3 Thu Aug 12, 2004 12:49pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:48am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1