Sideline position?

[OKREF]

Originally Posted by Adam

4-37 applies to stationary players (in a spot), and having both feet in bounds is not a listed requirement. It's only listed in the LGP section, so I don't see how it applies to a stationary player.

Yes it is..."every player is entitled to a spot on the playing court." If you have one foot OOB you are OOB, and not on the playing court.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by OKREF

Yes it is..."every player is entitled to a spot on the playing court." If you have one foot OOB you are OOB, and not on the playing court.

Then you should call the violation, as this is surely not an authorized reason.

If you can't call the violation when done intentionally (most of the time it is), then you can't say B1 isn't on the playing court.

This issue really needs to be clarified, and I admit if it is, it may well be clarified to your position.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

Was that player guarding anyone and thus needing to fit that part of the definition of LGP?

In the OP he was.

Originally Posted by letemplay

Looking for rule pertaining to defensive positioning on this play: A1 is advancing ball up sideline in backcourt. B1 takes a position (established) in front of A1, but with one foot on out of bounds line. Contact then occurs when A1 attempts to go around B1, but does not have enough room without going out of bounds himself. Is it legal or not for B1 to have the one foot oob?

[OKREF]

Originally Posted by Adam

Then you should call the violation, as this is surely not an authorized reason.

If you can't call the violation when done intentionally (most of the time it is), then you can't say B1 isn't on the playing court.

This issue really needs to be clarified, and I admit if it is, it may well be clarified to your position.

I can say he isn't on the playing court. His foot on the line puts him OOB , which means he isn't on the playing court. I would say the playing court is inbounds.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Adam

LGP isn't an ussue when the player isn't moving. Show me where a stationary player is required to have LGP.

4-37 applies to stationary players (in a spot), and having both feet in bounds is not a listed requirement. It's only listed in the LGP section, so I don't see how it applies to a stationary player.

Why is 4-37 part of this discussion, it applies to rebounding?

[OKREF]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Why is 4-37 part of this discussion, it applies to rebounding?

It does say everyone is entitled to a spot on the floor. Maybe no one is entitled to a spot.

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

In the OP he was.

Yep...but the thread took a left turn after that. Try to keep up, will ya?

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by OKREF

It does say everyone is entitled to a spot on the floor. Maybe no one is entitled to a spot.

10-6 ART. 11

A player shall adhere to the rules pertaining to illegal contact, including but not limited to, guarding as in 4-23, rebounding as in 4-37, screening as in 4-40, and verticality as in 4-45.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

It may be, but it is also something I rarely see and would not go with a violation if a player just steps out of bounds.

Peace

And I don't think you should. I don't understand, however, how it's a block if he hasn't left the court, though.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Adam

And I don't think you should. I don't understand, however, how it's a block if he hasn't left the court, though.

The original post had the defender with a foot on the out of bounds line. That buy rule and interpretation is a block if there is a block charge call to be made. I will admit I did not read carefully through ever debate or issue.

Peace

[Adam]

Frankly, I could just as easily take either side in this debate.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Adam

Frankly, I could just as easily take either side in this debate.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

Was that player guarding anyone and thus needing to fit that part of the definition of LGP?

Hey, something isn't right here.....you and I agree!

[DLH17]

Originally Posted by Adam

Like I said, unless you're willing to call the violation for leaving the court, I don't think you can say B1 has left the playing court. IOW, you either have a defensive violation (thus an immediate dead ball), or a pc.

I think it's important to remember that there are situations when players may legally leave the floor without violating. One example would be a player sprinting towards the end line to retrieve a ball headed out of bounds - throwing it back in bounds, then letting his momentum carry him OOB. He's fine if he immediately reenters. No violation.

Perhaps the player in the OP situation is OOB for a non violating reason.

If so, and there's contact, it's "on him" and not the offensive player regardless of his right to a spot on the court.

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by DLH17

I think it's important to remember that there are situations when players may legally leave the floor without violating. One example would be a player sprinting towards the end line to retrieve a ball headed out of bounds - throwing it back in bounds, then letting his momentum carry him OOB. He's fine if he immediately reenters. No violation.

Perhaps the player in the OP situation is OOB for a non violating reason.

If so, and there's contact, it's "on him" and not the offensive player regardless of his right to a spot on the court.

Sigh...if he is oob and attempts to draw a charge, then it's "on him". If he is just standing there looking at the ball he just attempted to save and the offensive player mows him down you can not seriously say you are going to put that "on him".

Too many people are taking one small statement in the rule book and trying to apply it to everything...it doesn't work that way.