NFHS emphasis on elbow contact

[Mendy Trent]

Can someone please give me an example of when they would call a foul on player whose elbow is completely stationary?

"Contact with a stationary elbow may be incidental or a common foul."

By definition, how can you commit a foul with your elbow if it isn't moving?

Thanks,

Mendy

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Mendy Trent

Can someone please give me an example of when they would call a foul on player whose elbow is completely stationary?

"Contact with a stationary elbow may be incidental or a common foul."

By definition, how can you commit a foul with your elbow if it isn't moving?

Thanks,

Mendy

The same way he would commit a foul with his knee without it moving.

[Mendy Trent]

Originally Posted by Adam

The same way he would commit a foul with his knee without it moving.

Can you be less vague? Do you mean sticking his elbows out to prevent a player from getting around a screen?

[BLydic]

Originally Posted by Mendy Trent

Can you be less vague?

If the elbows are stationary, but the torso is turned in such a way as to cause contact ...

[Mendy Trent]

Originally Posted by BLydic

If the elbows are stationary, but the torso is turned in such a way as to cause contact ...

You lost me. How can you cause contact if you are stationary?

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by BLydic

If the elbows are stationary, but the torso is turned in such a way as to cause contact ...

Then the elbows were not stationary. :/

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Mendy Trent

You lost me. How can you cause contact if you are stationary?

By extending the arms outside the frame of the body. They can be entirely stationary but in a position that is not legal if the opponent runs into them. The person with the arms extended "caused" the contact by having the arms in a position where they'd be hit.

And forget about "cause contact" for determining who a foul is on. Causing contact is not necessarily illegal. What is illegal is being in an illegal position or moving in a non-permissible direction when contact occurs, regardless of who caused it.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Then the elbows were not stationary. :/

Right. Elbows can be stationary, moving, or excessively swinging.

Onthe OP, it might be elbows out on a screen (like a blocking position in footbball), or an arm held out to prevent a defender from fronting, etc.

[Mendy Trent]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

By extending the arms outside the frame of the body. They can be entirely stationary but in a position that is not legal if the opponent runs into them. The person with the arms extended "caused" the contact by having the arms in a position where they'd be hit.

And forget about "cause contact" for determining who a foul is on. Causing contact is not necessarily illegal. What is illegal is being in an illegal position or moving in a non-permissible direction when contact occurs, regardless of who caused it.

While I understand your point, I don't think it makes sense to forget about who caused contact. Almost all fouls are committed by causing illegal contact. Even in the scenario you cite, the extended elbow causes the contact which creates the foul.

[legend]

Originally Posted by Mendy Trent

While I understand your point, I don't think it makes sense to forget about who caused contact. Almost all fouls are committed by causing illegal contact. Even in the scenario you cite, the extended elbow causes the contact which creates the foul.

This is seen alot on Illegal screens. Player sets screen with elbows extended beyond body and clips the side of the body (or possibly the head) of defender as he attempts to avoid the screener. Can't think of any other instance where you would see this type of play.

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by Mendy Trent

While I understand your point, I don't think it makes sense to forget about who caused contact.

It makes sense if the stationary player doesn't have legal position.

[AKOFL]

the sit i see is chinning the ball and having your elbows our to your side. Not moving and a defender tries to reach in and hits his head on your elbow on his way in to reach for the ball. thoughts.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Mendy Trent

While I understand your point, I don't think it makes sense to forget about who caused contact. Almost all fouls are committed by causing illegal contact. Even in the scenario you cite, the extended elbow causes the contact which creates the foul.

"Cause" is a positive action as it is commonly used in the realm of basketball. As such, the elbow in your example didn't cause the contact...it was just there. The other player caused contact by moving into it. It just happens that the reason it is a foul is that the elbow was not in a legal position when contact occurred.

Shooters cause contact all the time when they catch a defender out of position....maybe the arms are not vertical and the shooter ensures they cause contact in hopes of getting a foul (sometimes deserved, sometimes not).

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by AKOFL

the sit i see is chinning the ball and having your elbows our to your side. Not moving and a defender tries to reach in and hits his head on your elbow on his way in to reach for the ball. thoughts.

I have no foul. The ball handler doesn't have to clear a way for the defense to get to the ball. The elbows have to be somewhere and if the hand on that arm is holding the ball, I'm not going to consider it illegal when someone runs into it regardless of the position. If that arm is, instead, being used to shield the ball but not holding the ball or is extended in a very unnatural fashion, I would consider otherwise.

[tref]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

It makes sense if the stationary player doesn't have legal position.

+1

Officiating the on ball matchup & beyond is the key to knowing that the screener is illegal before contact occurs.

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

I have no foul. The ball handler doesn't have to clear a way for the defense to get to the ball. The elbows have to be somewhere and if the hand on that arm is holding the ball, I'm not going to consider it illegal when someone runs into it regardless of the position. If that arm is, instead, being used to shield the ball but not holding the ball or is extended in a very unnatural fashion, I would consider otherwise.

Great points, after all, who's going into who's vertical space.
You reach, I teach...