NFHS emphasis on elbow contact

[rwest]

A stationary player who is in the act of guarding requires LGP. Do you agree with that statement?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by rwest

A stationary player who is in the act of guarding requires LGP. Do you agree with that statement?

I do not.

[rwest]

Originally Posted by Adam

I do not.

LGP is a status that applies to both stationary and moving players who are in the act of guarding. The LGP rules states that to obtain LGP a player must have both feet on the court. This applies to a stationary player. If you are a stationary player facing your opponent with one foot in and one foot out of bounds and contact occurs it should be called a block because the stationary player did not have LGP. Out of bounds is not considered being on the court. LGP does apply to a stationary player in some scenarios.

I believe some are getting hung up on what about the player who has their back to an opponent and the opponent crashes into their back. LGP does not apply here because you only need LGP if you are guarding someone. Also, it doesn't apply because the player is entitled to the spot on the floor as long as they got there legally.

Consider this scenario.

B1 is guarding A1. A1 passes to A2 who drives up the court near the side line. B1 switches to guarding A2. When he pivots one foot is in and one is out. It is at this time that he is facing A2. He is not moving. A step later a crash occurs.

Did B1 have LGP? No. Was B1 a stationary player? Yes. What's your call?
I have a block because B1 never had LGP.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by rwest

LGP is a status that applies to both stationary and moving players who are in the act of guarding. The LGP rules states that to obtain LGP a player must have both feet on the court. This applies to a stationary player. If you are a stationary player facing your opponent with one foot in and one foot out of bounds and contact occurs it should be called a block because the stationary player did not have LGP. Out of bounds is not considered being on the court. LGP does apply to a stationary player in some scenarios.

I believe some are getting hung up on what about the player who has their back to an opponent and the opponent crashes into their back. LGP does not apply here because you only need LGP if you are guarding someone. Also, it doesn't apply because the player is entitled to the spot on the floor as long as they got there legally.

Consider this scenario.

B1 is guarding A1. A1 passes to A2 who drives up the court near the side line. B1 switches to guarding A2. When he pivots one foot is in and one is out. It is at this time that he is facing A2. He is not moving. A step later a crash occurs.

Did B1 have LGP? No. Was B1 a stationary player? Yes. What's your call?
I have a block because B1 never had LGP.

Your entire argument hinges on the mistaken belief that a defender must have LGP in order to draw a charge. You don't even need LGP to be guarding someone. You only need LGP to be moving or jumping when there is contact. That's it.

[rwest]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Your entire argument hinges on the mistaken belief that a defender must have LGP in order to draw a charge. You don't even need LGP to be guarding someone. You only need LGP to be moving or jumping when there is contact. That's it.

If B2 is guarding A2 when A1 drives the lane. If B2 moves to guard A2 but does not have two feet on the floor when contact occurs in the chest then I have a block. Why? Because the defender never had LGP. So yes in that instance he must have LGP to take a charge. To have LGP you must have two feet on the floor facing your opponent. You are mistaken when you make a blanket statement that LGP does not apply to a stationary player. In SOME instances it does. Its in the rule book black and white. To obtain LGP you must have two feet on the floor facing your opponent. That can be as a stationary player or a moving player. That's when LGP begins. You can then move to maintain (NOT OBTAIN) it. You are assuming that LGP only applies to a moving player. It does not. A stationary defender can be called for a block if they have one foot in and one foot out because they do not have LGP in that limited scenario.

It seems like all of you are suggesting that I am saying a stationary player always has to have LGP. I'm not saying that. However, you are making blanket statements that do not apply in all instances.

You are under the mistaken belief that LGP never applies to a stationary defender. It does SOME times.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by rwest

If B2 is guarding A2 when A1 drives the lane. If B2 moves to guard A2 but does not have two feet on the floor when contact occurs in the chest then I have a block. Why? Because the defender never had LGP. So yes in that instance he must have LGP to take a charge. To have LGP you must have two feet on the floor facing your opponent.

Wow. Just wow. Your understanding of LGP is getting even more off base. That is fundamentally just wrong. There is absolutely no requirement that B2's feet be on the floor when contact occurs.

Originally Posted by rwest

You are mistaken when you make a blanket statement that LGP does not apply to a stationary player. In SOME instances it does. Its in the rule book black and white. To obtain LGP you must have two feet on the floor facing your opponent. That can be as a stationary player or a moving player. That's when LGP begins.

My point is that, while a stationary player may have LGP, they don't need it.

Originally Posted by rwest

You can then move to maintain (NOT OBTAIN) it. You are assuming that LGP only applies to a moving player. It does not. A stationary defender can be called for a block if they have one foot in and one foot out because they do not have LGP in that limited scenario.

It seems like all of you are suggesting that I am saying a stationary player always has to have LGP. I'm not saying that. However, you are making blanket statements that do not apply in all instances.

You are under the mistaken belief that LGP never applies to a stationary defender. It does SOME times.

A stationary player can have LGP but it doesn't do anything for them. If they are stationary they're not doing anything that LGP permits them to do.

[rwest]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Wow. Just wow. Your understanding of LGP is getting even more off base. That is fundamentally just wrong. There is absolutely no requirement that B2's feet be on the floor when contact occurs.

My point is that, while a stationary player may have LGP, they don't need it.

A stationary player can have LGP but it doesn't do anything for them. If they are stationary they're not doing anything that LGP permits them to do.

I have kept this debate civil and now just because you can't prove me wrong you insult my rule knowledge! You have yet to prove that LGP is only required on a moving player. You can't even point to the rule that says so. You even agreed that you were basing that on the context of the rule, which you could be wrong about. The context I mean.

My understanding of LGP is solid. You have made the wrong assumption that LGP is only necessary for a moving player. That is wrong in some cases. The case play noted above for one. The rule book doesn't even say that LGP is only necessary for a moving player. You are inferring that.

Let me try and state this another way. If a stationary player does not have LGP in some instances the defender is more responsible for the contact. Again, my classic example. B2 has obtained LGP against A2 (ie both feet on the floor and torso facing the defender). That is definitely the requirement for obtaining LGP.

Now A1 gets by B1. B2, who has not established LGP on A1, moves to block A1's path up the court. In doing so B2 has one foot in and one foot out. He does not have LGP. B2 is more responsible for the contact. Unless A1 does something like pushing off or a forearm to the head or chest or if A1 could have avoided B2, I have a block on B2. He did not have LGP. In this instance it is required. It is not open season on B2. There are some things that I will still call a foul on A1 for. But in the event that a crash was inevitable and A1 did nothing excessive, I have a block on B2. Why? Because having one foot in bounds and one foot out is not a legal guarding position. We don't officiate in a vacuum. There are many things to take into consideration. However, a stationary player WHO IS PLAYING DEFENSE AGAINST AN OPPOSING PLAYER can be called for a foul because they don't have LGP. In this instance. Not in every instance. Remember, I am the one staying away from blanket statements. That's why the foul is called on B2. Because they did not legally obtained LGP when the contact occurred. How else do you get a block on this play? What rule? There is no rule regarding a defender being out of bounds and being called for a foul for being out of bounds other than the LGP. You can not be out of bounds and play defense. Well you can, but you MAY be called for a foul in doing so. Why? Because of the LGP principle. Does that mean that every foul will be called on the defender in this case? No. But it does put more responsibility on the defender in this case.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by rwest

If B2 is guarding A2 when A1 drives the lane. If B2 moves to guard A2 but does not have two feet on the floor when contact occurs in the chest then I have a block. Why? Because the defender never had LGP. ...

While I do not disagree with some of the points you have made in this thread you are completely wrong on this point. Once LGP is established B2 may move to maintain LGP and having 1 foot in the air at the time of contact means nothing.

[rwest]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

While I do not disagree with some of the points you have made in this thread you are completely wrong on this point. Once LGP is established B2 may move to maintain LGP and having 1 foot in the air at the time of contact means nothing.

Once LGP is established you are correct. The foot in the air means nothing. I said that the defender had NOT OBTAINED LGP. Or at least I meant to. The foot in the air when moving to OBTAINED LGP does have some bearing assuming that the foot is still in the air when contact occurred and LGP has not been established.

[OKREF]

Originally Posted by rwest

LGP is a status that applies to both stationary and moving players who are in the act of guarding. The LGP rules states that to obtain LGP a player must have both feet on the court. This applies to a stationary player. If you are a stationary player facing your opponent with one foot in and one foot out of bounds and contact occurs it should be called a block because the stationary player did not have LGP. Out of bounds is not considered being on the court. LGP does apply to a stationary player in some scenarios.

I believe some are getting hung up on what about the player who has their back to an opponent and the opponent crashes into their back. LGP does not apply here because you only need LGP if you are guarding someone. Also, it doesn't apply because the player is entitled to the spot on the floor as long as they got there legally.

Consider this scenario.

B1 is guarding A1. A1 passes to A2 who drives up the court near the side line. B1 switches to guarding A2. When he pivots one foot is in and one is out. It is at this time that he is facing A2. He is not moving. A step later a crash occurs.

Did B1 have LGP? No. Was B1 a stationary player? Yes. What's your call?
I have a block because B1 never had LGP.

Block

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by rwest

LGP is a status that applies to both stationary and moving players who are in the act of guarding. The LGP rules states that to obtain LGP a player must have both feet on the court. This applies to a stationary player. If you are a stationary player facing your opponent with one foot in and one foot out of bounds and contact occurs it should be called a block because the stationary player did not have LGP. Out of bounds is not considered being on the court. LGP does apply to a stationary player in some scenarios.

I believe some are getting hung up on what about the player who has their back to an opponent and the opponent crashes into their back. LGP does not apply here because you only need LGP if you are guarding someone. Also, it doesn't apply because the player is entitled to the spot on the floor as long as they got there legally.

Consider this scenario.

B1 is guarding A1. A1 passes to A2 who drives up the court near the side line. B1 switches to guarding A2. When he pivots one foot is in and one is out. It is at this time that he is facing A2. He is not moving. A step later a crash occurs.

Did B1 have LGP? No. Was B1 a stationary player? Yes. What's your call?
I have a block because B1 never had LGP.

I have a block because B1 does not have a legal position on the court.
LGP has nothing to do with a stationary defender.

If A2 takes his arm and shoves B1, then I have a player control foul.

The defender can't make a legal basketball play from his location, but opponents cannot whack him just because he has a foot on the boundary line.

[OKREF]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

LGP has nothing to do with a stationary defender.

You have to have LGP to start a five second count, and during a five second you could be stationary, so it would apply to a stationary defender. You have to be within 6 feet and be in a legal guarding position.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by OKREF

You have to have LGP to start a five second count, and during a five second you could be stationary, so it would apply to a stationary defender. You have to be within 6 feet and be in a legal guarding position.

You are talking about the requirement for a "closely guarded count/violation." True, that violation requires the defender to obtain LGP AND be within six feet.

I am commenting simply on a defender. A player can be a defender an stand sideways without moving, never obtaining LGP, and still has a right to not get fouled by an opponent. However, he lacks certain other rights. You have named one of them--closely guarded. The defender cannot cause the closely guarded count to be enacted. This defender also does not have the right to be moving laterally or obliquely at the time of contact. Both of those are additional rights that a defender earns after obtaining LGP.

[OKREF]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

You are talking about the requirement for a "closely guarded count/violation." True, that violation requires the defender to obtain LGP AND be within six feet.

I am commenting simply on a defender. A player can be a defender an stand sideways without moving, never obtaining LGP, and still has a right to not get fouled by an opponent. However, he lacks certain other rights. You have named one of them--closely guarded. The defender cannot cause the closely guarded count to be enacted. This defender also does not have the right to be moving laterally or obliquely at the time of contact. Both of those are additional rights that a defender earns after obtaining LGP.

Agreed...My thought on OOB and contact. If the defensive player is straddling line, they do not have legal guarding position, and aren't legally on the court, therefore in my opinion the offense can't be charged a foul if contact occurs. Just my thought, not saying I am absolutely right either, just my interpretation.

[rwest]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

I have a block because B1 does not have a legal position on the court.
LGP has nothing to do with a stationary defender.

If A2 takes his arm and shoves B1, then I have a player control foul.

The defender can't make a legal basketball play from his location, but opponents cannot whack him just because he has a foot on the boundary line.

If LGP does not apply to a stationary defender in SOME instances why is the definition to obtain LGP you must have two feet on the floor and facing your opponent. Because it does in SOME instances apply to a stationary defender. Its right there in black in white.