Screening plays from our friends at the DVBOA

[canuckrefguy]

1. Legal - legs are 'wide' but runs smack into screener's torso area anyway.

2. Fifty shades of illegal.

3. Illegal - screener would have been good but eliminated the necessary time/distance by moving forward into the defender.

As for the 2-person/3-person argument - no question 3 whistles is better...but the screens all happen directly in front of trail. Even the second one, which is blatantly illegal, the Trail sees the whole play, but passes - he even shakes his head to confirm he is passing.

[maven]

Originally Posted by canuckrefguy

1. Legal - legs are 'wide' but runs smack into screener's torso area anyway.

May I suggest reviewing the screening rules? The wide base is not a legal position, and responsibility for contact falls on the screener.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by maven

May I suggest reviewing the screening rules? The wide base is not a legal position, and responsibility for contact falls on the screener.

ONLY if the contact is on the extended leg. If the contact is on the torso, the legs could be a far out as they can get them. The following could still be a legal screen depending on where the contact occurs...

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

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

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by canuckrefguy

3. Illegal - screener would have been good but eliminated the necessary time/distance by moving forward into the defender.

Really? Just don't see that at all. He was back peddling down the court, stopped to let the defender run into him then continued backing down the court. I just don't see him moving toward the defender at all.

[canuckrefguy]

Originally Posted by maven

May I suggest reviewing the screening rules? The wide base is not a legal position, and responsibility for contact falls on the screener.

May I suggest applying the rules realistically instead of seeing everything in black and white?

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Really? Just don't see that at all. He was back peddling down the court, stopped to let the defender run into him then continued backing down the court. I just don't see him moving toward the defender at all.

It's not a big move; the feet are set but screener makes a forward motion with his upper body; very slight, and definitely not egregious. A 50/50 one for sure. With T's floor-level view, might have a different opinion, not sure.

[Terrapins Fan]

Originally Posted by canuckrefguy

1. Legal - legs are 'wide' but runs smack into screener's torso area anyway.

Call it early and they clean it up.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Terrapins Fan

Call it early and they clean it up.

I do believe it is an illegal screen but are you suggesting that a foul be called when a screen is was legal but ugly?

[kk13]

Originally Posted by terrapins fan

call it early and they clean it up.

amen!!!

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by canuckrefguy

Fifty shades of ...

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

[canuckrefguy]

Originally Posted by billymac

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

hehe