NFHS emphasis on elbow contact

[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.