Flop

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

However, once the player leaves the floor, there is no chance for that player to change direction or speed, so the intent would be that defender should not be allowed to move to another spot until the airborne player lands.

B1 has legal position directly in A1's path. A1 becomes airborne, so he has no chance to change direction or speed. Contact is imminent. B1 takes a step back. Contact is still imminent, only slightly delayed. Nothing has changed. A1 is still responsible.

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by just another ref

B1 has legal position directly in A1's path. A1 becomes airborne, so he has no chance to change direction or speed. Contact is imminent. B1 takes a step back. Contact is still imminent, only slightly delayed. Nothing has changed. A1 is still responsible.

Valid opinion. And that's how it is probably called most often in practice. But we still disagree as to whether the wording of 4-23-4(b) and 4-23-5(d) allows for additional movement in any direction after the player is airborne.

[Sharpshooternes]

Originally Posted by just another ref

B1 has legal position directly in A1's path. A1 becomes airborne, so he has no chance to change direction or speed. Contact is imminent. B1 takes a step back. Contact is still imminent, only slightly delayed. Nothing has changed. A1 is still responsible.

I am with just another ref on this one. I think the point is to prevent the defense from undercutting an airborne shooter by moving into their path after they are airborne. If the defense is in their path when they become airborne and move backwards in the same path it still should be PC. Moving backwards should not change the defense's rights. If he moved forward, that would be one thing but straight backwards, STILL IN THE PATH of the shooter should be shooters responsibility.