Call on the court = Block. Your opinion?

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

UHmmmm, Camron it seems that you are adding quite a bit here to the definition of obtaining LGP. I get that you are explaining your position on the call, but that's adding a whole lot to what the rule book actually says.

What am i adding?

LGP requires the defender to be in the path of the opponent with 2 feet on the floor and facing the opponent. That's it. Right???

The path the opponent takes is right over the block (reference point only). So, that is the only path that matters.

The defender is facing the opponent the entire time...check.

The defender is in a possible path, but is not in "the" actual path of the opponent until the defender gets her body over the block. (an arm, foot, or leg in the path is not in the path).

She has 2 feet on the floor prior to getting to the block but not being in "the" path of the opponent yet, that is not sufficient. Both feet must be on the floor while being in the path. When she is over the block and in "the" path, contact occurs before she can establish position by getting the 2nd foot down.

Again, what am I adding?

[rockyroad]

Guess I was just confused by all the stuff about the block in your other post...but - initial LGP is established when the player has both feet on the ground and the torso facing the opponent...then the defender may move/change within the limits provided in the rules. So the whole "in the path" stuff seems to be your addition.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

Guess I was just confused by all the stuff about the block in your other post...but - initial LGP is established when the player has both feet on the ground and the torso facing the opponent...then the defender may move/change within the limits provided in the rules. So the whole "in the path" stuff seems to be your addition.

Not my addition, it is straight from the NFHS and NCAA rulebooks. To obtain LGP, the defender has to satisfy the definition of guarding (in the path) and the requirements for LGP (two feet on the floor, facing, etc.). You can't have LGP at all if you don't satisfy the base requirements of guarding.


NFHS Rule 4, Section 23
ART. 1 . . . Guarding is the act of legally placing the body in the path of an
offensive opponent. ...... A player who extends an arm, shoulder, hip or leg into the path of an opponent is not considered to have a legal position
if contact occurs.
ART. 2 . . . To obtain an initial legal guarding position:
a. The guard must have both feet touching the playing court.
b. The front of the guard’s torso must be facing the opponent.

NCAA Rule 4, Section 35
Art. 1. Guarding shall be the act of legally placing the body in the path of an offensive opponent.
Art. 4. To establish an initial legal guarding position on the player with the ball:
a. The guard shall have both fee touching the playing court...

[BillyMac]

Did we scare him away? Where's Jurassic Referee when you really need him?

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Did we scare him away? Where's Jurassic Referee when you really need him?

Why? This place is immensely better now. The number of gratuitous insults and the name calling that was sure to occur, and caused a lot of lurkers and new posters to disappear, if you disagreed with him is not something to wish for.

[JetMetFan]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

Yes this call should come from the C - who happens to be in a terrible position on this play. And it's not a secondary defender - there was never any other defender to be a "primary defender" who got beat. So the C should have this call as the drive originated in his primary.

Rocky, I don't think DeMayo's (the C) positioning is that bad because part of his job on that play was to follow/stay even with the ball as it came up court, which he did.

When he made the call he looked to be about 3-4' above the FT line extended - not ideal but I'm guessing that's where he felt he had to stop to be able to see the dribbler.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Why? This place is immensely better now. The number of gratuitous insults and the name calling that was sure to occur, and caused a lot of lurkers and new posters to disappear, if you disagreed with him is not something to wish for.

Agree. He scared me from joining the Forum for the several months that I just observed. I detest, and despise, name calling more than anybody on the Forum, but he made it type of art form. Almost something to admire. He was sure real good at keeping posters like Old School at bay. And in terms of rules, and mechanics, he was right about 98% of the time. There's no substitute for experience.

[BLydic]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

What am i adding?

LGP requires the defender to be in the path of the opponent with 2 feet on the floor and facing the opponent. That's it. Right???

Again, what am I adding?

I don't think you are adding anything. However, you might be missing something, the words "obtaining initial". Again, I am responding with NFHS ruleset in mind and that might be the difference.

What you describe is obtaining initial legal guarding position. Art 3 of Rule 4-23 continues to say that after initial LGP is obtained,

a) the guard may have one or both feet on the playing court or be airborne, provided he/she has inbound status
b) the guard is not required to continue facing the opponent
c) the guard may move laterally or obliquely to maintain position, provided it is not toward the opponent when contact occurs .....

The dragging left foot, which looks off the floor on the first camera angle, is still sliding in place on contact, but isn't this the case of maintaining LGP and not really obtaining it?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by BLydic

I don't think you are adding anything. However, you might be missing something, the words "obtaining initial". Again, I am responding with NFHS ruleset in mind and that might be the difference.

What you describe is obtaining initial legal guarding position. Art 3 of Rule 4-23 continues to say that after initial LGP is obtained,

a) the guard may have one or both feet on the playing court or be airborne, provided he/she has inbound status
b) the guard is not required to continue facing the opponent
c) the guard may move laterally or obliquely to maintain position, provided it is not toward the opponent when contact occurs .....

The dragging left foot, which looks off the floor on the first camera angle, is still sliding in place on contact, but isn't this the case of maintaining LGP and not really obtaining it?

CR is saying in order to establish it, he must have had two feet on the floor "in the path." I think he's taking "in the path" and putting it into a place where it's not intended. Otherwise, there'd be a third criteria listed in "to obtain legal guarding position...."

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

CR is saying in order to establish it, he must have had two feet on the floor "in the path." I think he's taking "in the path" and putting it into a place where it's not intended. Otherwise, there'd be a third criteria listed in "to obtain legal guarding position...."

And that's where I was getting confused...thanks for stating it better than I was.

Jerk.

Now shutup.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

And that's where I was getting confused...thanks for stating it better than I was.

Jerk.

Now shutup.

I was starting to question my opinion after a while. Thanks for making me feel less alone.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

CR is saying in order to establish it, he must have had two feet on the floor "in the path." I think he's taking "in the path" and putting it into a place where it's not intended. Otherwise, there'd be a third criteria listed in "to obtain legal guarding position...."

The "in the path" is a global requirement for guarding. It applies to everything about guarding. If you are not in the path, you are not guarding at all. The additional requirements to obtain/maintain LGP are not relevant since you're not even guarding.


If you don't, agree, how about this play....

B3 trailing A4 down the court from behind momentarily has both feet on the floor and is facing A4. B2 is fast enough to pass A4 and steps into A4's path with one foot down and his/her back to A4 just as A4 runs into B3. B2 previously had both feet on the floor and was facing A4 (all from behind) and is now in A4's path. Are you saying this is a charge?


Additionally, since all players have two feet down at some point in the game why have that requirement in obtaining LGP if it didn't go with the additional qualifier of being in the path with two feet down (and facing)?

[rockyroad]

In order to establish LGP, the defender has to have both feet on the floor and the torso facing the offensive player...they are then allowed to move to maintain that LGP. If they move "into the path" with LGP then their movement is legal...they don't have to be "in the path" to obtain LGP.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

In order to establish LGP, the defender has to have both feet on the floor and the torso facing the offensive player...they are then allowed to move to maintain that LGP. If they move "into the path" with LGP then their movement is legal...they don't have to be "in the path" to obtain LGP.

That is simply wrong. I can't say it any plainer. NFHS and NCAA rules are very clear that you are not guarding at all if you are not in the path. A player can't obtain LGP unless they're in the path. Then, they can move to maintain it once they've been in the path with both feet down and facing.

See my play above. Block or Charge?

From AR 246...
A player who is guarding moves into the path of a dribbler and contact occurs.
RULING: Either player may be responsible, but the greater responsibility shall be that of the dribbler when the defensive player who is guarding conforms to legal guarding principles. In order to establish initial legal guarding position, the defender must be facing the dribbler and have both feet touching the playing court. When the defensive player jumps into position, both feet must return to the floor after the jump before he/she has attained a legal guarding position. No specific stance, time or distance shall be required. The guard may shift to maintain his/her position in the path of the dribbler, provided that the player who is guarding neither charges into the dribbler nor otherwise causes contact.

(Blue) If having two feet on the floor is all that is needed, why does the blue part require the two feet down again after jumping into the path of the dribbler if they were already on the floor before moving into the path?

(Red) If the guard is allowed to shift to maintain their position in the path of the dribbler, doesn't that imply they had to first obtain a position in the path of a dribbler.

[tref]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

He was sure real good at keeping posters like Old School at bay. And in terms of rules, and mechanics, he was right about 98% of the time. There's no substitute for experience.

True dat, he sure taught me alot!! I have a fun feeling he's watching from afar.