Iowa State/Kansas (Clip Added)

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

...the defender's movement was not "lateral" or "oblique". Instead, the movement was directly sideways into the path already started into by the dribbler.

Can you please explain what you think is different about the 2 bolded phrases?

[BryanV21]

Originally Posted by Rich

What you described is the definition of lateral.

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Can you please explain what you think is different about the 2 bolded phrases?

"Lateral" movement (in terms of the rule) is related to the movement of the dribbler. The rule book doesn't stop at "the guard may move laterally or obliquely", but continues by saying "...to maintain position".

In this case, the defender did not "maintain position", as his movement sideways caused him to be closer to the dribbler than he originally was when he gained LGP.

So again... what did the dribbler do wrong? He tried going around the defender after the defender had gained LGP, as the book states he must do.

[APG]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

Is it me, or is the rule book skewed towards defense? It's like the NFHS is trying to make up for the fact that for years good defense was penalized by officials.

Why do you believe this? For the most part, the rule book places the onus on the defense to get legal and to maintain that legality.

[youngump]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

This should have been a PC foul at the very least.

And at the most, no? Or did you have something else here too?

[BryanV21]

Originally Posted by APG

Why do you believe this? For the most part, the rule book places the onus on the defense to get legal and to maintain that legality.

Because they go into great detail on what legal guarding is, but say little to nothing in regards to legally trying to avoid a charging call. It's like once a defender has LGP, they can do no wrong, and therefore any contact is the fault of the offense.

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

"Lateral" movement (in terms of the rule) is related to the movement of the dribbler. The rule book doesn't stop at "the guard may move laterally or obliquely", but continues by saying "...to maintain position".

In this case, the defender did not "maintain position", as his movement sideways caused him to be closer to the dribbler than he originally was when he gained LGP.

So again... what did the dribbler do wrong? He tried going around the defender after the defender had gained LGP, as the book states he must do.

So basically you are looking at this as the defender moved sideways, the dribbler was getting closer to the defender, so therefore the defender did something wrong by not maintaining the same distance between himself and the dribbler?

Am I reading your comments correctly?

If so, you are really wrong...if not, then your attempts to explain your thinking are not coming through very clearly.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

"Lateral" movement (in terms of the rule) is related to the movement of the dribbler. The rule book doesn't stop at "the guard may move laterally or obliquely", but continues by saying "...to maintain position".

In this case, the defender did not "maintain position", as his movement sideways caused him to be closer to the dribbler than he originally was when he gained LGP.

So again... what did the dribbler do wrong? He tried going around the defender after the defender had gained LGP, as the book states he must do.

The player with the ball closed the distance. The defender does NOT have to give ground and keep the distance the same during the entire play. He established LGP and moved laterally -- the player with the ball moved into the defender.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by youngump

And at the most, no? Or did you have something else here too?

I guess you could make a case for a no-call, but I do not think you should call a foul on the defender in this case.

Peace

[johnny d]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

In this case, the defender did not "maintain position", as his movement sideways caused him to be closer to the dribbler than he originally was when he gained LGP.

So what if he is closer to the dribbler than he was when he obtained LGP. The dribbler caused them to be closer by moving forwards. The defender moved lateral/sideways and maintained his LGP, he did not move forward or towards the dribbler. Therefore, the onus is on the offensive player to avoid contact. You are not just in the minority on this point, you are the single official incapable of understanding this concept.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

"Lateral" movement (in terms of the rule) is related to the movement of the dribbler. The rule book doesn't stop at "the guard may move laterally or obliquely", but continues by saying "...to maintain position".

In this case, the defender did not "maintain position", as his movement sideways caused him to be closer to the dribbler than he originally was when he gained LGP.

So again... what did the dribbler do wrong? He tried going around the defender after the defender had gained LGP, as the book states he must do.

That's where the "gets head and shoulders past the defense" come in.

if the defense is so late to move that even a lateral move causes contact on the offense's side, then it's a block. But even if the move makes the distance shorter, if the defense gets there first, it's a charge.

[APG]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

Because they go into great detail on what legal guarding is, but say little to nothing in regards to legally trying to avoid a charging call. It's like once a defender has LGP, they can do no wrong, and therefore any contact is the fault of the offense.

The dribbler has to stop or change direction...he needs to change direction in a manner in which the defender will lose LGP. The rule book doesn't go into much detail (besides mentioning greater responsibility for contact shifting to the defender if the dribbler gets head and shoulders past the defender) because how much more detail do you need?

[johnny d]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

So again... what did the dribbler do wrong? He tried going around the defender after the defender had gained LGP, as the book states he must do.

What he did wrong is run over a defender who was in LGP. The book doesn't say he has to try to avoid contact with the defender that has LGP, it says he must avoid contact with the defender that has LGP or he is responsible for the resulting contact.

Next you will tell us a foul should not be called on a defensive player that hits a shooter on the arm if said defender was trying to avoid hitting the offensive player on the arm.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

It's like once a defender has LGP, they can do no wrong, and therefore any contact is the fault of the offense.

This is not true. In the first place LGP can be lost just as quickly as it was established, depending on the movement of both players. Also, a player may have LGP then commit a foul by moving forward into the dribbler or by extending an arm and making contact. And of course the foul can still be on the offense without the defender ever having LGP at all.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

"Lateral" movement (in terms of the rule) is related to the movement of the dribbler. The rule book doesn't stop at "the guard may move laterally or obliquely", but continues by saying "...to maintain position".

In this case, the defender did not "maintain position", as his movement sideways caused him to be closer to the dribbler than he originally was when he gained LGP.

So again... what did the dribbler do wrong? He tried going around the defender after the defender had gained LGP, as the book states he must do.

The defensive player moved laterally (and actually back one step), the offensive player moved towards him.

It's one thing to disagree on judgment. It's quite another to tell a bunch of veteran officials that they don't know what the definition of maintaining a LGP is.

If you want to be Don Quixote', fine. But Don Quixotes don't fare very well in camps or with supervisors.

[johnny d]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

The defensive player moved laterally (and actually back one step), the offensive player moved towards him.

It one thing to disagree on judgment. It's quite another to tell a bunch of veteran officials that they don't know what the definition of maintaining a LGP is.

If you want to be Don Quixote', fine. But Don Quixotes don't fare very well in camps or with supervisors.

Possibly the first Don Quixote reference on this forum. Nice