Not facing the opponent

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

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.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by mbyron

You're talking about jumping. I didn't mention jumping.

Nah, here is what you said...

Originally Posted by mbyron

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.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

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

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

The verticality rule says that must have LGP to have the right to the space above them....whether by jumping or raising their arms.

Originally Posted by JRutledge

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.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

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

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

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?

Fully stationary players, yes. But not moving/jumping.

Originally Posted by JRutledge

And verticality is not just about someone jumping it is about staying in your vertical plane.

Peace

Indeed, but you can't take advantage of verticality (by either raising arms or jumping) until the requirements of verticality are met (LGP when defending, or legal rebounding position if rebounding).

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Fully stationary players, yes. But not moving/jumping.


Indeed, but you can't take advantage of verticality (by either raising arms or jumping) until the requirements of verticality are met (LGP when defending, or legal rebounding position if rebounding).

Thanks, Camron. The rule says players are entitled to their spot "on the playing floor." Not in the air.

[just another ref]

If a player is stationary, then jumps or raises his arms in his own vertical plane, he can't possibly contact anyone unless that player leaves his own vertical plane. Then what?

[bainsey]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Indeed, but you can't take advantage of verticality (by either raising arms or jumping) until the requirements of verticality are met (LGP when defending, or legal rebounding position if rebounding).

So, are you saying, if you're not facing the ball handler (and therefore don't have LGP), you don't have the rights to verticality, that if you jump straight up, and contact takes place (assuming it's not a stiff-arm or elbow from the shooter), this would be a blocking foul?

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

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........

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

The verticality rule says that must have LGP to have the right to the space above them....whether by jumping or raising their arms.

So you're also saying that if B1 is standing facing the basket with his arms raised in anticipation of a rebound, and A1 drives in, and in the process of taking a shot contacts B1's totally stationary arm, it can be a foul on B1?

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by just another ref

So you're also saying that if B1 is standing facing the basket with his arms raised in anticipation of a rebound, and A1 drives in, and in the process of taking a shot contacts B1's totally stationary arm, it can be a foul on B1?

As the rule is written, it can be.

Will I call it? Maybe not.

The rule is pretty clear about when verticality applies and when such actions are allowed (only with LGP).

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

As the rule is written, it can be.

Will I call it? Maybe not.

The rule is pretty clear about when verticality applies and when such actions are allowed (only with LGP).

Verticality explains all these things that one can do that are legal. If a stationary defender jumps straight up and is contacted by the offensive player, where's the part which says this is illegal?

[Rob1968]

Wow! This thread is the result of yet another case of poor wording by the editors of the Rules Book.
It seems to me that in 4-23 - Guarding, and 4-37 - Rebounding, and 4-45 - Verticality, there are two subjects addressed, in very sloppily structured paragraphs, or Articles.
4-23-1, third sentence, deals with players on the playing court, without reference to LGP: "Every player is entitled to a spot on the playing court provided such player gets there first without illegally contacting an opponent."
The following sentence introduces that statement's relation to actions of opponents: "A player who extends an arm, shoulder, hip or leg into the path of an opponent is not considered to have legal guarding position if contact occurs." Such action can occur whether or not the player is guarding an opponent.
4-23-2 defines an intial LGP, which is a new subject. It is not intended to define a "player position".

4-37-1 defines rebounding.
4-37-2 describes obtaining or maintaining legal rebounding position.
4-37-2 d. states: "To obtain or maintain legal rebounding position, a player may not: Violate the principle of verticality."
And 4-37-3 reiterates the statement in 4-23-1, regarding player position. Thus, in rebounding, guarding is not neccessarily involved, but verticality is.

4-45 begins with "Verticality applies to a legal (player) position." It is
not a statement about LGP.
Then, Articles 1-7 deal with Verticality, in reference to opponents, and thus, LGP.
Although it is an extrapolation, the common understanding of Verticality is that it applies to a player having the right to his place when in contact with the floor, and when jumping within his vertical area. The notion that when a player,/defender jumps "within his vertical area" he forfeits his right to verticality, seems anathema to the generally accepted legal/illegal actions of players, whether they are, at that moment, in offensive or defensive attitude.
Thus, Cameron, I respectfully disagree with your stance on the subject.

[MiamiWadeCounty]

Originally Posted by Rob1968

Wow! This thread is the result of yet another case of poor wording by the editors of the Rules Book.

I've always said that.

NBA and FIBA made it cleared in their rules books that a player, with or without LGP, is entitled to a vertical position even to the extent of holding his arms above his shoulders.