It's also possible to have a blocking foul when LGP had been established.

Yes, but I'm in the camp that says it was never established in this play.

If she were moving at angle to cut A1 at the bottom block then her left foot would be at that spot at the time of collision. Instead her right foot (which was behind her back at 0:42) is what ends up at the bottom block while her left foot is still back in the paint. In fact, first contact is made with B1's right foot to A1's left foot. That is not retreating, turning to absorb, or moving obliquely. That is B1 moving towards A1.

You can use all the little cute phrases you like (terrible argument; tick question; listening to the crowd :confused: ), that doesn't change what B1 did at the point of contact.

I don't even know WTF "listening to the crowd" is supposed to mean.

I don't see the defensive player ever obtaining a LGP, prior to the contact.

Why not....turnin "into" is synonymous with moving towards. Hard to imagine it means anything else.

While it is a block, the statement above is incorrect. Possession of the ball by the opponent is not a requirement to have LGP. It may change time and distance required to have LGP but that really isn't the point here.

And, I can't, in any twisted reading of the rules, imagine who a PC would cross anyone's mind. This is a block every day of the week and it isn't even close. She was never facing at any point as far as can be seen in the video. She may have gotten into the path but was far from obtaining LGP.

If the B1 has a LGP against A1 then a blocking foul by B1 against A1 cannot happen.

MTD, Sr.

I apologize in advance for the length of the post.
 

It appears that some people equate LGP with being a defender being positioned on a straight line between an offensive player, who is control of the ball, and the offensive player's team's basket. There is no rule support for this requirement.

Let me describe several scenarios. In each scenario imagine a line running the length of the court connecting the both [Table Side (TS)and Opposite the Table (OT)] free throw lane lines.

But first a historical note: For as long as I have been a basketball official (1971) the definition of LGP was the same, word for word, for three (NFHS, NCAA, and FIBA) rules codes. Until the late 1990's NFHS, NCAA, and FIBA used the word "establish" in their definition of LGP when the NFHS changed the word "establish" to "obtain". This change did not change the definition of LGP. NFHS's decision's to make this change is a story for another time but a good friend and basketball official from Connecticut was the driving force for this change; unfortunately he was never able to get the NCAA Rules Committees to also make the change. None-the-less, I will use the word "obtain" and consider it interchangeable with the word "establish". In fact for me old habits die hard and I tend the use the word "establish" over the word "obtain".


Scenario #1:

A1 has control of the ball for a throw-in along the end line in Team A's backcourt and is standing out-of-bounds where the TS free throw lane line intersects the end line. A2 is in Team A's backcourt standing outside the OT free throw lane at the free throw line. A3 is standing in Team A's backcourt along the OT side line where the free throw line extended intersects the OT side line.


Scenario #2:

A1 has control of the ball for a throw-in along the end line in Team A's backcourt and is standing out-of-bounds where the TS free throw lane line intersects the end line. A1 then passes the ball to A2 who is in Team A's backcourt standing outside the OT free throw lane at the free throw line. A3 is standing in Team A's backcourt along the OT side line where there free throw line extended intersects the OT side line.


Scenario #3:

A1 has control of the ball for a throw-in along the end line in Team A's backcourt and is standing out-of-bounds where the TS free throw lane line intersects the end line. A1 passes the ball (and then starts to run toward Team A's front court along the TS free throw lane line extended) to A2 who is in Team A's backcourt standing outside the OT free throw lane at the free throw line; A2 then starts to dribble toward Team A's front court along the OT free throw lane line extended. A3 is standing in Team A's backcourt along the OT side line where there free throw line extended intersects the OT side line; as A2 starts to dribble A3 starts to run toward Team A's front court along the OT side line.


In all three Scenarios:

B1 is standing in Team A's front court at the division line where the TS free throw lane line extended intersects the division line; B1 is facing A1. B2 is standing in Team A's front court where the free throw line and the OT lane line intersect; B2 is facing A2. B3 is standing in Team A's front court where free throw line extended intersects the OT side line.

Question: Has B1, B2, or B3 obtained a LGP?


MTD, Sr.

Camron:

I do not have a problem with you and I not agreeing on whether this is a "block" or a "charge" because I know that we are on the same page with regard to the definition of guarding and how the definition is to be applied, and we each have made a decision as to whether LGP had been obtained/established or not.

But I am going to use your post about "turning into" as synonymous with "moving towards" to make a point. I do not think that "turning into" or "moving towards" are the best phrases to describe the play we are discussing.

The orientation of B1's body with relation to A1 is not important whether one believes B1 has obtained a LGP or has not obtained a LGP.

If the official judges B1 has obtained a LGP and has been moving to maintain it, the only thing that the official must determine is whether or not if B1 is "moving obliquely into" A1 at the moment of contact between the two players. If the answer is no, then we have a charge, and if the answer is yes, then we have a block.

MTD, Sr.

Right, I am saying until the dribbler was within a few feet of the defender, the defender was never in the path (which is one criteria needed to establish LGP). After the defender does get in the path, at that moment the front of her torso is not facing the dribbler (another criteria needed). I am watching the play from halfcourt to the contact, and while the defender may have established all the necessary elements of LGP at different points throughout the play, the defender never gets all the required ingredients at once. Thus no LGP, therefore block.

Just for my information, what situations?

I am in this camp as well.

Imagine what the browsing fans are thinking when they see that we can't agree. lol


I've got the same call as the L. I do think LGP was obtained early on and later on when B1 did turn her body toward A1 briefly.

Turning into a player or turning away from contact is the same physical action, the only difference is intent. One shoulder has to move forward towards the player and the other will move away.

My question to those who do not feel the facing requirement of LGP has been met is this: how directly must a defender face an opponent to meet the facing requirement? Is it 5 degrees? 15? 45? What is you line of demarcation?

Having LGP grants some rights, but they're limited. If a player who has established LGP moves forward into the shooter at contact, it's a blocking foul. LGP had been established, but the movement by the defender exceeded the legal limits.

On this play in particular, it's possible to think she did establish LGP and still think it was a block due to her actions at the point of contact (moving into the shooter.

Ok, I was expecting you to say something else. I thought you had written still has LGP instead of still had LGP. In the situations you mention, at the time of the foul the defender has lost LGP for those various reasons.