NFHS closely guarded rule
 

Regarding the closely guarded rule:

I had an official tell me that he NFHS rule book only says closely guarded, and no mention that a player has to also be within 6 feet. He said that distance doesn't matter, and that closely guarded is up to official's judgment.

I know the defender has to remain within 6 feet to maintain the count, but I don't know the rule/case reference. Could someone please post it?

Thanks.

One Fathom ...
 

4-10: A closely guarded situation occurs when a player in control of the ball in his/her
team’s frontcourt, is continuously guarded by any opponent who is within six feet
of the player who is holding or dribbling the ball. The distance shall be measured
from the forward foot/feet of the defender to the forward foot/feet of the ball
handler. A closely guarded count shall be terminated when the offensive player in
control of the ball gets his/her head and shoulders past the defensive player.

Also...
 

If another defender switches onto the offensive player, assumes a closely-guarded situation and then the first defender leaves, the count continues.

9.10.1 SITUATION B:

While dribbling in A's frontcourt, A1 is closely guarded by B1. After two seconds, B2 also assumes a closely-guarded position on A1 and B1 leaves to guard A2.

RULING: The closely-guarded count continues. There is no requirement for the defensive player to remain the same during the count as long as A1 is closely-guarded throughout.

Just For Fun ...
 

Defensive player B1 is closely guarding, less than six feet, dribbler A1. A1 dribbles, shoulder to shoulder, past legal screener A2. B1 goes behind screener A2 and still maintains a distance of less than six feet from the dribbler A1. Defensive player B1 continues to closely guard, less than six feet, dribbler A1 on the other side of the screen.

In a NFHS high school game, does the official continue his closely guarded count throughout this play?

You had to bring up that one, didn't you?

Since I read the case book play as I searched for the rule citation in my other post I'll exclude myself from answering. ;)

That official should be smacked for screwing up such a basic rule.

I say yes according to the case play but let me see your bet and raise you one. What if ball handler A1 is more than six feet from B1 but is screened by A2. B1 is still attempting to get through the screen but is less than 6 feet from A2. Does the count still continue.

Then add this. A1 gets head and shoulders past the screened defender on the way for a lay up because of the screen, but defender gets back in front before the lay up and 5 seconds has expired. What do you have then?

This Caseplay ???
 

9.10.1 SITUATION D: Team A, while in possession of the ball in its frontcourt:
(a) positions four players parallel with the sideline and they pass the ball from one
to another with their arms reaching beyond the sideline plane; or (b) has four
teammates surround dribbler A1. In both (a) and (b), the opponents are unable
to get close to the ball. RULING: This is considered to be a closely-guarded
situation and a violation in five seconds in both (a) and (b), if any B player is
within 6 feet of the ball or within 6 feet of the screening teammates and is
attempting to gain control of the ball. Preventing opponents from getting to the
ball by using screening teammates becomes a violation in five seconds if the
opponents are attempting to gain control.

Another Infamous IAABO Refresher Exam Question ...
 

This was one of those controversial IAABO Refresher Exam questions a few years ago. Most of us said to continue the five second count. IAABO said no. Eventually IAABO told us that they had mixed up the NFHS interpretation with the NCAA interpretation.

Actually, he didn't get smacked. My player got smacked with a T for complaining that no one was even close to him. It was pretty comical because he was our point guard standing between the top of the key and half court re-setting the offense. This was an AAU game, using NFHS-rules, so I don't believe we had high school caliber refs.

So the official called the 5 second violation? Where was the defender?

The free throw line.

Wow.

Considering the last part of this rule, having the head and shoulders past the defensive player, would the offensive player need to be on a path TOWARDS the basket? Would moving in a lateral direction be enough to have the count dropped, provided the dribbler is by the defender?

Rule 4-23-1.
"There is no minimum distance required between the guard and opponent, but the maximum is 6 feet when closely guarded."

Rule 9-10 proscribes the violation for holding or dribbling a ball "while closely guarded."

If this were Real Housewives of Atlanta you would be "Tardy to the Party". :p

Turn in your man card at the front desk.

BayState back in the lead.

My wife likes that show, too.

Which is viewed while you are out officiating. Right? RIGHT? RIGHT?!?!?!?

You need to control her television time better.

Hey, we all learn sometime.

A few years ago, I had a five-second violation in a middle school boys' game. The coach was stunned, replying, "THAT was three feet?!"

I smiled, I informed, and he learned.

You're right...I was too harsh with that statement.

can you be more specific? the ft line to the top of the arc is only 3 feet and 3 feet beyond that is still between the half court line and the top of the arc, which is 6 feet, so it is possible to have a count

You may want to re-check the ol' court diagram in any rule book. Or online. Or anywhere.

Toto, I've Got A Feeling We're Not Watching Kansas Basketball Anymore ...
 

Stupid metric system.

Court Diagram ...
 

74' court? :D

Can anyone answer my question here?

No

Yes

No, the count should be maintained.

The distance is measured North/South.

thanks for catching my egregious mistake
play on

If A1 is moving laterally (parallel to division line) and the defender maintained a position that would put him in the path of A1 if A1 changed direction towards the endline then yes I would keep my count. If A1 has gotten far enough ahead that he could turn the corner and the defender would be trailing then I would stop my count.

+1

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.

disagree with your yes answer on lateral guarding.

Edit: unless 'by' means past defender?

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

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.

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.

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.

NCAA RULE BOOK. Closely Guarded
 

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.

I just figured you played on a very small court.

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.

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.

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?

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 :rolleyes:

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?

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.

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.

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

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. :(

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.


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.

BBR,

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

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...

Hey, you were the one who said, "...this is about ego."

I didn't tell you how to run your game. But I am of the opinion that anyone who gets the red *** just because a coach produces a rule book to try to correct a mistake, that's a lot more than "a little healthy ego."

He's allowed to go to the table to request a timeout for a correctable error OR a rule misapplication. The rules do not forbid him from having a rule book, nor have I ever seen any case play or interp supporting penalizing a coach who has a rule book and uses it in a professional manner. If he's going to address a rule misapplication, then he's going to have to be able to prove that he's right and you're wrong.

Even so, you're still wrong. If he gets head and shoulders by the defender and is moving away from him, even if he's headed to the sideline the count should cease. The defender is no longer in his path.

So you telling me, I can run from sideline to sideline and as long as you for example is trailing me. But is still within the 6' radius the count should cease( because I have my head and shoulder past you) with no attempt towards the basket. I truly don't believe that is the intent of the rule.


I just may be wrong show me a casebook play to back your statement up that I am wrong.

4-23-1
Guarding is the act of legally placing the body in the path of an offensive opponent.

If I'm chasing you from behind (trailing), I am NOT in your path, am I?

Ok, big timer..Bottom line. I cannot dispute the rule as written under 4-23-1...

4-23-3c states: The guard my move laterally or obliquely to maintain position, provided it is not toward the opponent when contact occurs.

So, I take it as as long as the defender is between the ball handler and the basket a count will be maintained.

The defender is within the 6' radius and moving laterally. Just because the ball handler is slightly past him/her in my judgement does not terminate the closely guard count if moving laterally and not attempting to score.

If A1 is going laterally parallel to the division line (with division line to A1's right and defender to A1's left) and B1 is trailing far enough that if A1 turns and faces left and no part of the B1 would be in A1's path then I'm killing the count.

First, "big timer?" Hardly. Old timer? Yeah.

Second, the basket has nothing to do with it. That's what we're trying to get you to understand. If moving laterally or obliquely keeps the defender in the dribbler's path, then he is still guarding. Trailing the opponent is not guarding him, as you stated earlier.

Finally, if you were more open minded to what old timers have to say instead of being so defensive, you might pick up a few tidbits. At least, that's a lesson I learned when I first got here.

Exactly.

First, Ok, Old timer, it is. :)

Second, I got the basket reference is irrelevant to the rule. I stand to be corrected on "trailing a person with the ball is not considered guarding according to the rules". I have no legs to stand on with that one.

My point I was attempting to get across (which may not have been done clearly) is. I don't believe the rule intent is for the count to be discontinued just because the ball handler who is moving laterally and gets his/her head and shoulder past the defender without movement towards the endline.

Third, I stand to be corrected on "trailing a person with the ball is not considered guarding according to the rules".

Finally, Who's to say that during discussions something is not being taken away? Just because one may not agree openly doesn't mean they are not taking something (tidbits) away.

We all got your point, you were crystal. You want to add movement toward the basket to the closely guarded requirements.
The rules just say path not any particular direction of the path...