NFHS emphasis on elbow contact

[Adam]

Originally Posted by rwest

I have addressed this. Was B1 guarding A2? No! Doesn't need LGP in that instance. A2 can't run him over. I have a charge.

Was he guarding him then turned his back to A2 for a possible rebound? Once you obtain LGP you do not have to continue to face him. Still have a charge.

Your last one could be a block. I would have to see it in real time. But he does not have LGP and if his foot is not down on the ground he is not stationary! You can't have it both ways. This is similar to a classic secondary defender. B2 moves to guard A1 driving to the lane but does not have two feet down when contact occurs in the torso. Block! NO LGP.

Again if LGP on a stationary player is not required, what do you have when B2 moves to guard A2 (never having LGP to begin with) lands with one foot in and one foot out of bounds when contact occurs in the torso? He is a stationary player without LGP. You should have a block. Now if the same thing occurs with both feet in, you have a charge. What's the difference? Hmmm? Let me see? Oh, the stationary player had LGP in one case but not the other. So yes, in SOME cases a stationary defender needs LGP.

You guys are making blanket statements that do not apply in all situations. I am not. I am saying that SOME TIMES A STATIONARY PLAYER NEEDS LGP. The rule book backs me up!

No, it doesn't. LGP grants the right to move, that's it. Without LGP, there is another rule that should be applied, the right to a spot on the floor.

So, you're saying that in my two scenarios, B1 is guilty of a block only if he's facing his opponent.

Let change them again, to see how you rule.
In my first scenario, B1 lifts one foot just prior to being plowed by A2. He never turns to face A1, but he never leaves his spot on the floor. He merely lifts his foot. Are you saying that he's moving because his foot is in the air?

My issues are:

1. No where does it say a player with a foot on the line has an illegal position on the court.
2. No where does it define "stationary" as having both feet on the floor.


Without this case play, you would be virtually alone in this discussion here, as no where else due the rules come close to implying that LGP is required for a player who is not moving from his spot on the court. The question seems to be whether this case is saying B1's spot on the court is not legal if he's got a foot on the line.