NFHS closely guarded rule

tref

fullor30 wrote
disagree with your yes answer on lateral guarding.

Edit: unless 'by' means past defender?

I interpreted "by" as meaning head & shoulders past the defender.

truerookie

Rob1968 wrote
Neither 4-10 nor 9-10, nor 9.10 make reference to directional orientation on the floor.
9.10.1(a) references the sideline, and (b) makes no reference to directional orientation.
Of course, the common desire of the offense is to advance the ball towards their basket. And, however rare, it is possible for a defender to be guarding within the 6-foot spec, as the dribbler moves across the court.
Also, in a trapping defensive mode, the defender(s) may be within the 6-foot spec but not on the side of the ballhandler that is closest to the offensive goal.
Please, help me out with your statement.

I interpret this as moving in attacking the basket to score. Thus, the N/S reference. If the ball handler is moving laterally and is not even attempting to attack the basket (turn the corner), I don't see a need to drop the count just because the ball handler has gotten head and shoulder past the defender.

Adam

Bottom line, I'm not dropping my count just because the dribbler retreats (thus making his head and shoulders "past" the defender). If a defender is staying between the dribbler and the basket while the dribbler goes sideways, it's going to seem as if the head and shoulders are past since the defender is maintaining an angle towards the hoop rather than directly in the dribbler's path. I'm keeping my count here, too.

umpref19

Coach Bill. Please next time you see this official please point out the rule 4-10 to him. Also please report him to his board because to me officials like this who don't know a basic rule should not be on the court refereeing. An official like this makes up stuff and I can only imagine what else he makes up when he referee's a game.

umpref19

Section 13. Closely Guarded
Art. 1. (Men) A player in control in the front court only while holding or
dribbling the ball is closely guarded when his opponent is in a guarding
stance at a distance not exceeding 6 feet. This distance shall be measured
from the forward foot or feet of the defender to the forward foot or feet of
the opponent.
Art. 2. (Women) A player in control anywhere on the playing court while
holding (not dribbling) the ball is closely guarded when her opponent is in
a guarding stance at a distance not exceeding 3 feet. This distance shall be
measured from the forward foot or feet of the defender to the forward foot
or feet of the opponent.
Art. 3. After the start of a five-second closely guarded count, in order for
a closely guarded violation to occur, there shall be continuous guarding by
the same opponent.
Art. 4. When a player is positioned between the player in control of the ball
and his or her opponent, who is within 6 feet (men) or 3 feet (women), a
closely guarded situation does not exist.

BktBallRef

icallfouls wrote
thanks for catching my egregious mistake
play on

I just figured you played on a very small court.

BktBallRef

truerookie wrote
No, the count should be maintained.

The distance is measured North/South.

Gotta a rule reference that says that?

Once the dribbler is head/shoulders by the defender and moving away, the count should stop, as he's no longer in his path. North/South has nothing to do with it.

Smitty

umpref19 wrote
Coach Bill. Please next time you see this official please point out the rule 4-10 to him. Also please report him to his board because to me officials like this who don't know a basic rule should not be on the court refereeing. An official like this makes up stuff and I can only imagine what else he makes up when he referee's a game.

This was in an AAU game. You get what you pay for - it's quite possible the official was just a kid working for extra zit cream money. It's never a good idea for a coach to whip out a rule book. And report him to his board? A little over the top...

Adam

Smitty wrote
This was in an AAU game. You get what you pay for - it's quite possible the official was just a kid working for extra zit cream money. It's never a good idea for a coach to whip out a rule book. And report him to his board? A little over the top...

Agreed on all counts.

tref

Smitty wrote
It's never a good idea for a coach to whip out a rule book.

That's pretty much an automatic for me.

Coach: What was that for?

Me: 10-4-1 look it up!

BktBallRef

tref wrote
That's pretty much an automatic for me.

Coach: What was that for?

Me: 10-4-1 look it up!

Why? Coaches are allowed to go to the table for such a reason. Why would you get the red a$$ because he pulled out a rule book to show you where you misapplied a rule?

Welpe

BktBallRef wrote
Why? Coaches are allowed to go to the table for such a reason. Why would you get the red a$$ because he pulled out a rule book to show you where you misapplied a rule?

On a baseball field, pulling out a rulebook is considered showing up the umpire.

I'd consider it no different on the court. Whack-a-mole.

tref

Welpe wrote
On a baseball field, pulling out a rulebook is considered showing up the umpire.

I'd consider it no different on the court. Whack-a-mole.

Im sure he knows that... he knows everything else 🙄

Raymond

Welpe wrote
On a baseball field, pulling out a rulebook is considered showing up the umpire.

I'd consider it no different on the court. Whack-a-mole.

How would we ever be in a position where the HC would even be able to show me a rule book or even have enough time to find the rule in question before dead ball period expired?

BktBallRef

Welpe wrote
On a baseball field, pulling out a rulebook is considered showing up the umpire.

I'd consider it no different on the court. Whack-a-mole.

And that's just as much stupid macho BS on the field as it would be on the court. As long as the coach is professional about it, there's no need to let your ego get in the way.

Welpe

BadNewsRef wrote
How would we ever be in a position where the HC would even be able to show me a rule book or even have enough time to find the rule in question before dead ball period expired?

I'm sure we wouldn't.

Tony, frankly this is about ego. I know that I know the rule and I may be charitable enough to tell him to put it away once but I'm not entertaining the idea of even looking in the book. He doens't get to use a prop to try and make a point with me and believe me, that's what he is doing.

BktBallRef

Welpe wrote
Tony, frankly this is about ego.

That's sad. I hope my ego never gets that big.

I know that I know the rule and I may be charitable enough to tell him to put it away once but I'm not entertaining the idea of even looking in the book. He doens't get to use a prop to try and make a point with me and believe me, that's what he is doing.

Even though the rules allow him to do it? I bet the three officials that misapplied the rule at the end of the 1st half of the UNCA - Syracuse game think they know the rule, too.

But they didn't. 🙁

Welpe

BktBallRef wrote
That's sad. I hope my ego never gets that big.

A little healthy ego is a good thing. You are free to ask anybody I work with, I do not have an inflated sense of self worth but I also have limits on behavior I tolerate. What works for you is fine, I'm not going to presume to tell you how to run your game.

Even though the rules allow him to do it?

Where pray tell do the rules say he is allowed to? 5-8-4? There's nothing there explicitly allowing him to bring out a rulebook and this situation isn't a correctable error situation anyways.

truerookie

BktBallRef wrote
Gotta a rule reference that says that?

Once the dribbler is head/shoulders by the defender and moving away, the count should stop, as he's no longer in his path. North/South has nothing to do with it.

BBR,

the N/S reference was in relation to attacking the basket to score. An orientation aspect.

tref

Welpe wrote
Where pray tell do the rules say he is allowed to? 5-8-4? There's nothing there explicitly allowing him to bring out a rulebook and this situation isn't a correctable error situation anyways.

Not sure where it says thats legal but 10-4-1a says its illegal IMO.

Bringing out a rulebook suggest that we shouldn't be getting paid for our work because we dont know the rules...

« Previous Page Next Page »