Make The Call: Illegal Screen

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by tref

Talk about setting the standard! Sorry partner but I cannot mirror that call...

Lets ask ourselves exactly how was the defender disadvantaged?
The player he was attempting to get to made the extra pass to the corner. ...

But also look at it as how it affected the defenders ability to react to the 2nd pass. They were in a zone and he was responsible for challenging that corner jumper. That bump put him off-balance and made it impossible to recover to the corner. IMO, that screen was designed to keep the defender from the 2nd pass, not the 1st.

[tref]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

But also look at it as how it affected the defenders ability to react to the 2nd pass. They were in a zone and he was responsible for challenging that corner jumper. That bump put him off-balance and made it impossible to recover to the corner.

I saw that & still feel like the shooter in the corner would've been wide open anyway.
Just not enough for me... I prefer my off-ball calls to be bigger than that.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by tref

I saw that & still feel like the shooter in the corner would've been wide open anyway.
Just not enough for me... I prefer my off-ball calls to be bigger than that.

Away from the play, easy lay-off on this type of contact. But on the ball, to me, it's 50/50 and I'm thinking earlier plays may have influenced this particular call.

[tref]

I hear ya! Yes, watching an entire game & then breaking down plays based on the game trumps breaking down a single play when we have no idea what occured previously. I'm not complaining, because some film is better than none. IJS

[JetMetFan]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

The only question I have, did the contact displace the defender or did the defender try to go around him and slight contact took place?

This was my thought on first look. It's a question of whether the screener caused contact or did the defender see the contact coming and try to avoid it. As far as I'm concerned it's the latter.

Originally Posted by Da Official

I'm thinking the screener was a repeat offender or there had been some illegal screens before this play and the L was looking and ready to bust the next illegal screen.

I think this definitely had something to do with it. The call comes in the second half of the game. There must have been something that happened on a screen either a few minutes prior or in the first half which helped this one along.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by JetMetFan

This was my thought on first look. It's a question of whether the screener caused contact or did the defender see the contact coming and try to avoid it. As far as I'm concerned it's the latter.

Yet, the screener came out even farther and created contact to ensure the defender was impeded by the screen. The screener moved out on purpose to create contact and did so and delayed the defender even more than they would have been delayed by simply going around the original screen. That is a textbook illegal screen.

Some plays deserve a whistle even though the offended party is not knocked on their butt.

[jeschmit]

Originally Posted by tref

Talk about setting the standard! Sorry partner but I cannot mirror that call...

Lets ask ourselves exactly how was the defender disadvantaged?
The player he was attempting to get to made the extra pass to the corner. IMO the defender wasnt getting there had it been no screen at all.

Even if I've had conversation with the player/coach about him moving on the screen, this is not the one I'm making an example of.

This is exactly what I was thinking when I saw this call... I wouldn't want to be making illegal screen calls all night long if we were going to set the bar here.

I think the contact was marginal at best, and I would talk to the kid about keeping his screens legal next time. I don't think this is anything to go get...

[Adam]

Originally Posted by tref

I saw that & still feel like the shooter in the corner would've been wide open anyway.
Just not enough for me... I prefer my off-ball calls to be bigger than that.

And I prefer getting the good ones like this so we can maybe avoid the "bigger" ones to begin with.

And all this talk about "marginal" contact (not from you, but in this thread) is driving me crazy. There's no such thing, contact is either "incidental" or "illegal," and the level of contact (from marginal to severe) often has nothing to do with whether it's illegal or not. This is a classic freedom of movement play, IMO.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

And I prefer getting the good ones like this so we can maybe avoid the "bigger" ones to begin with.

And all this talk about "marginal" contact (not from you, but in this thread) is driving me crazy. There's no such thing, contact is either "incidental" or "illegal," and the level of contact (from marginal to severe) often has nothing to do with whether it's illegal or not. This is a classic freedom of movement play, IMO.

Snaqs, in the conference that play came from there is most definitely "marginal contact" at play in discussions about fouls.