Illegal Screen or Not

[AKOFL]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Then it's not illegal; it's incidental contact.

do you have a problem with marginal contact vs incidental?

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by AKOFL

do you have a problem with marginal contact vs incidental?

Marginal contact can still be a foul. By definition, incidental contact is not a foul.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by AKOFL

do you have a problem with marginal contact vs incidental?

Only insofaras "marginal" contact is not defined.

All contact is either incidental or illegal. Marginal contact is no different, it's still one or the other.

Marginal contact is nothing more than either:
a) Illegal contact that is close to being incidental.
or
b) Incidental contact that is close to being illegal.

I'm not sure what other useful definition of "marginal" there is, or if you mean something different by the term.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Only insofaras "marginal" contact is not defined.

All contact is either incidental or illegal. Marginal contact is no different, it's still one or the other.

Marginal contact is nothing more than either:
a) Illegal contact that is close to being incidental.
or
b) Incidental contact that is close to being illegal.

I'm not sure what other useful definition of "marginal" there is, or if you mean something different by the term.

You are right, but not every term is defined or rulebook based. But is very common to describe contact as marginal and marginal usually means there is no foul or wait to see if the contact affects the play. This was simply used to describe what probably should have not been called.

Peace

[Adam]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

You are right, but not every term is defined or rulebook based. But is very common to describe contact as marginal and marginal usually means there is no foul or wait to see if the contact affects the play. This was simply used to describe what probably should have not been called.

Peace

I get that, and I don't have a problem with the word itself. I won't use it with coaches, however, because it doesn't mean anything. Others can probably use it to good effect.

For me, it's far easier to say the contact was incidental, or to tell a coach that "it didn't even slow your guy down, Coach."

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

I get that, and I don't have a problem with the word itself. I won't use it with coaches, however, because it doesn't mean anything. Others can probably use it to good effect.

For me, it's far easier to say the contact was incidental, or to tell a coach that "it didn't even slow your guy down, Coach."

I would have have used the term. Marginal means it is not definite either way. Then again I probably would not say either, I would just say I do not have a foul. Again, no right or wrong here.

Peace

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by 7IronRef

The play you are referring to is nothing. The screen did not even impede the defender.

No, but it did reroute him.

The defender had to take a different and longer path to the shooter as a result. The only question which is not really clear form the video is how much contact there really was on that play. If there was contact that caused him go go around, then it should have been called. Unfortunately, it appears the lead was not looking where he should have been and we'll never know.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

No, but it did reroute him.

The defender had to take a different and longer path to the shooter as a result. The only question which is not really clear form the video is how much contact there really was on that play. If there was contact that caused him go go around, then it should have been called. Unfortunately, it appears the lead was not looking where he should have been and we'll never know.

Did the contact reroute him or did the player reroute himself? That is my question.

Peace

[APG]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Did the contact reroute him or did the player reroute himself? That is my question.

Peace

I'm not even sure if there's contact. But say there was, I can't ever see that being called regularly at any high level of play.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

I'm not even sure if there's contact. But say there was, I can't ever see that being called regularly at any high level of play.

+1

That is why I said, "rerouting himself." I am not convinced there was any contact and I am not convinced that any contact was the reason he took that route.

Peace

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

I'm not even sure if there's contact. But say there was, I can't ever see that being called regularly at any high level of play.

Originally Posted by JRutledge

+1

That is why I said, "rerouting himself." I am not convinced there was any contact and I am not convinced that any contact was the reason he took that route.

Peace

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Did the contact reroute him or did the player reroute himself? That is my question.

Peace

Which is why I said.,,,

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

The only question which is not really clear form the video is how much contact there really was on that play.

[Pantherdreams]

In order:

1- I don't have this as an illegal screen based on the evidence here and out of context.

2 - To me at best this is a marginal call at best so to make a marginal call outside of your area with lots going on in your own seems like a) a d-bag move to throw your partner under the bus b) something has occured earlier in the game to make the screening issue hyper sensitive


Based on what I'm seeing on the video the screener extends beyond his body. I don't see that any contact occurs that impedes or disadvantages. (from the angle of the video anyway).

In our area if that is an illegal screen you are going to be calling 25+ player control fouls a night.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Pantherdreams

In our area if that is an illegal screen you are going to be calling 25+ player control fouls a night.

Like everything, if you call 2-3, 25+ will not happen

(Disclaimer: This is not saying this one should or should not be called)

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Like everything, if you call 2-3, 25+ will not happen

(Disclaimer: This is not saying this one should or should not be called)

My thoughts exactly. If you call 2-3, normally, that's all you need. At most, you may get to 5 or so.