![]() |
Not facing the opponent
A-1 goes airborne. Defender B-2 has his spot in the lane, but facing in another direction (turned about a 90 degrees from the path of the shooter). Instinctively, the defender jumps, and has clear verticality, but is not facing the shooter when contact is made (shooter's torso into defender's side). This was an easy blocking foul, as the defender wasn't facing the shooter at all.
Generally speaking, and outside of an outstretched limb from the shooter, when would you have a charge -- or nothing -- when contact occurs, and the defender isn't facing the dribbler/shooter? |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
By the way, it seems to me that LGP is required for airborne verticality to apply. But the alternate question is whether the spot to which a player is entitled includes the air above the floor. I'm not sure it does, as 4-23-1 says the player is entiteld to his spot "on the playing floor." |
Quote:
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. |
Facing the opponent would only effect this play if the defender moved away from the spot.
10-6-7 |
Quote:
Peace |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Thanks for that, and the other feedback. I will now serve a self-imposed one-week suspension for my error. :D |
Quote:
|
Quote:
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) |
Quote:
Then again, considering my OP, take strong consideration of what that's worth. |
Quote:
|
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.<a href="http://s1174.photobucket.com/albums/r620/HawkeyeCubP/?action=view&current=Publication1.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://i1174.photobucket.com/albums/r620/HawkeyeCubP/Publication1.jpg" border="0" alt="Photobucket"></a>
|
Quote:
|
LGP grants the right to move and jump. Without it a player doesn't have the right to do either when contact occurs. Here is the rule on verticality...
Verticality applies to a legal position. Following are the basic components of the principle of verticality:So, until they have LGP, they may have a legal spot by getting there first but when they jump without having LGP, they forfeit the right to their spot....in a sense, they're moving to a new spot above the one they started from and the verticality rule doesn't allow them to do so. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
A-1 is guarded by B-2, who is in the lane and facing A-1 (has LGP). A-1 passes to A-3, who drives and goes airborne. B-2, who is not facing A-3 but remains on his spot, jumps straight up. There is body contact between A-3 and B-2. Blocking foul? |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Player A1 catches a pass near 3 point line, and squares up to shoot. B1 arrives too late to contest the shot, so he takes a position in front of A1 with his back to him intending to box him out. He turns to see A1 still holding the ball, looking into the post. He jumps straight up with his hands up, hoping to deflect the pass. A1 puts the ball on the floor and plows into B1's back. Ruling: blocking foul on B1 not bloody likely |
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
Peace |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
Rule 4-45 VERTICALITYI 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. |
Quote:
Peace |
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
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?
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Peace |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Will I call it? Maybe not. The rule is pretty clear about when verticality applies and when such actions are allowed (only with LGP). |
Quote:
|
I does git wordie at times . . .
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. |
Quote:
The RA doesn't allow ILGP to be obtained in there, but by your logic, a secondary defender doesn't need LGP to draw PC foul in the RA if he's not moving when contact occurs, even though they made it clear that no secondary defender can be there no matter how long they've been stationed in there. |
Quote:
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. |
Quote:
2) It's clear that the rule says something to the effect that "a player is entitled to his/her spot on the floor provided s/he gets there legally first." Standing in the RA is NOT getting there "legally." 3) Your'e wrong about his logic. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
In the generally accepted actions, the players RARELY have their backs to the opponent involved in the play....they are usually facing them. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Get's 'Em Every Time ...
Quote:
|
Quote:
This statement, and others, intimate, and indeed indicate, that the vertical plane is considered in regards to contact between opponents, whether the opponents are grounded or airborne. I still see the statements regarding verticality as applying to two subjects: 1) a player and his inherent right to a position on the floor 2) a player and his rights regarding contact with an opponent, be it a defender or an offensive player. Where does one find reference to "a spot on the playing court" meaning "in contact with the playing surface"? Is not the concept of verticality meant to define the reality of movement by all players, in a game which intrinsically involves leaving the playing surface vertically? So, A1 facing B1, with his back to B2, who has the ball, sees that B1 looks upward, and reaches upward, as if to receive a pass from B2. A1, thinking to foil the pass attempt, jumps, within his vertical plane. While in the air, B2 drives into the back of A1. Blocking foul on A1?...Really? |
Quote:
If the contact is in the torso, the jump doesn't change the point of contact. However, if they jump and make contact with a shooter's arms above them, they will only be able to do so legally if they have obtained LGP. But, if they had LGP, they can legally jump up such that it results in contact in the space above them and not be guilty of a foul. |
Quote:
Cited again.... ART. 1. Legal guarding position must be obtained initially and movement thereafter must be legal. ART. 2 . . . From this position, the defender may rise or jump vertically and occupy the space within his/her vertical plane. ART. 3 . . . The hands and arms of the defender may be raised within his/her vertical plane while on the floor or in the air. |
Quote:
Quote:
If the defender sticks his arms out over the shooter, and the shooter goes straight up, creating contact, foul on the defense, whether he previously had LGP or not. So, in the unlikely event that the shooter goes up, leans out over the defender, then the defender goes straight up, I don't see how this can also be a foul on the defender. |
Quote:
The player with the ball isn't given any more protection or consideration. They both have a way to earn the right to the space above them. If they earn it, they get it. If not and there is contact, the one who causes the contact is at fault, not necessarily the one who is outside their vertical space. |
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
You mean, just like the defender did? |
Quote:
|
Cameron,
I get where you are coming from, but in order to call the game that way, I would need a more official interpretation than what we talk about here. All other indication they are not asking for this kind of restrictions on a vertical player. Peace |
Quote:
"During the game, each player has the right to occupy any position (cylinder) on the playing court not already occupied by an opponent. This principle protects the space on the floor which he occupies and the space above him when he jumps vertically within that space." And this what NBA rules say: "A player is entitled to a vertical position even to the extent of holding his arms above his shoulders, as in post play or when double-teaming in pressing tactics." FIBA's verticality rules clearly apply to an airborne player. NBA's verticality rules kind of suggest that it apply to an airborne player, but who knows sure? One thing for sure is that in the NBA and FIBA a defender doesn't need LGP to be in a vertical position. |
Quote:
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:02am. |