Pick A Prize From The Top Shelf ...
 

Bingo, especially in slow motion. Nevertheless, a tough call either way.

Odd Reference ...
 

I did not know that canuckrefguy was a gal who does a lot of reading. Who woulda guessed it?

The Forum Should Prohibit Violent Images ...
 

I'm in a lot of pain just looking at this image. All kinds of pain, in a few different places.

hehe :D

2 and 3 illegal. 1, although legs are extended, contact is centered and initiated by defender. I'm not calling that. That said,I'm not locking horns with anyone if someone sees it the other way.

You might want to look at #1 again...the screener also threw his shoulder into the defender in addition to being late.

I dunno, Camron - if he does, it's about the same level of "throwing" of the body that occurs in play #3 IMO :confused:

Not at all. I think the guy in #3 just stopped and stood up. The screener in #1 drove his shoulder into the defender. The screen in #1 was bad for 2-3 reasons. That is just one of them but puts the icing on the cake.

The guy didn't "just stand up". His chest area "clearly" moves into the defender.

And by "clearly" I mean about as "clearly" as the alleged shoulder in play #1.

In neither play is the alleged movement really obvious. That's why I think they're both 50/50 types of plays.

In the end, both plays #1 and #3 are going to be passed on and called - in both cases I'm willing to bet peoples' opinions are going to be split.

I am not saying call something that is not there, it is there, call it.

Just like an offensive foul, call it, they change the way they drive to the basket. Instead of dropping their shoulder, they go vertical.

Assume they both did as you describe. They're still not the same.

The screener in #1 was shifting it out to the side to create contact that may not have otherwise occurred...the shoulder in combination with him sticking the leg out AND not giving time/distance, at a iminimum, makes the contact worse than it would have been and maybe even created contact that shouldn't have been.

In #3, that defender was going to run into that screen no matter what. His teammates needed to alert him to that screen. What little shift the screener may have made didn't really change what was going to happen.

Clearly, neither was called in the videos. I just think that #1 is a must get and #3 is marginal.

A lot of people have said that time and distance are an issue in #1. Maybe I'm not interpreting time and distance right or maybe the fiba rules are written differently.

If you feel the guy defending is moving when the screen is set (and I'm not) then he needs room to step between 1 and two steps.

If you feel the defender is stationary when the screen is set then assuming he can see laterally he has no expectation of time and space.

amen!!!

Agree with all of this. #1 has a wide stance but the wide stance isn't the problem, the contact occurs with the torso primarily, so I would agree with the no call.

I think the second one is the most clearly illegal and I don't see how you could pass on it. Forget the arm activity, the screeners right leg extends and trips the defender. How are the forearms the only thing making contact when the right leg clearly trips the defender?

The 1st and 3rd I can see room for debate.

The 1st play I would lean toward being illegal followed by a clear blocking foul on the 2nd defender. Hard to believe they had no whistle on that play.

The 3rd play I would lean toward legal.