Make The Call: Illegal Screen
 

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/eqDbCCrXUp0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

The contact is slight but it did put the defender off his course.

Wish the C wasn't so high. He was actually backing away as that pass was being made.

Whether those on the bench saw anything or not, certainly no arguing from them!

Good call, contact redirected the defender farther around the screen than would have happened without the movement.

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? And in this kind of screen this is one where I would like to see what was called with other screens. Sometimes screened players just try to go around the screen and not go through the screen. Again no one said anything, but I would have liked to have seen a little more contact to call this. Then again the angle was not very good so in my mind I can see how little contact could take place. It would just be a question I would ask the official if I was a clinician or evaluating the tape.

Peace

Too Close To Call, Too Close To Not Call ...
 

The first time I viewed the video, I didn't even see the screen, either legal, or illegal (ball watching). The second time that I viewed it, I saw the screen and didn't think that there was any contact. The third time that I viewed the video, I did spot some slight illegal contact. With my view from this side of my new 18.5 inch computer monitor, I would have no problem if the official either called the illegal screen, or if he passed on the call. There definitely was contact, but was it incidental contact, or illegal contact? Maybe you had to be there?

I'd have to have more contact on this play to have an illegal screen. The contact, IMO, is marginal at best.

That was my opinion at first also, but though the contact was marginal it did affect the play.

Agreed.

If I ever call this a foul, this is a least amount of contact I've judged to be a foul.

Not much contact but I've watched it a few times and the more I watch the more I like the call.

Now I'm thinking about the calls I've let go on similar plays and wondering if I've put the defense at a undeserved disadvantage.

Nice post, gets us thinking, which is what this board is supposed to do.

Agreed, I'm good with a whistle here.

By rule....definitely ok with the call. Taken by itself I probably wouldn't have called it. 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 say that because the Lead came out so hard you would have thought the defender got knocked to the floor or something egregious had occurred...

To me, it looks like the L was a bit straighlined at the point of contact. Any chance he thought there was more contact than in actuality?

There was only that small amount of contact because the defender was trying to get around the screen rather than run into it. The fact that there was still contact and the defender had, as a result of the movement, been rerouted to a much less preferable line is all I need to call that foul. Had the screener been stationary, the defender would have not had to go so far around.

Requiring a defender to be knocked over or dramatically off course (on a screen that is part of the actual play) to get an illegal screen call is just not fair to the defense.

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.

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.

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.

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

some thoughts
 

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.

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.

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.

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...

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.