Oakland vs Youngstown State (video and article)

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Why is this play so "brilliant and clever?" It's been around forever.

Because it's Yahoo Sports.

[MD Longhorn]

I can see an IS call here - he may well have been moving.

I have a real hard time with a defensive foul though.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

First, full disclosure: Everybody knows I am a graduate of Youngstown State University.

Second: While I wish that YSU had won, they have lost too many close games this year to be worthy of going to the NCAA.

Third: I would have called an illegal screen on OU-2 because he did not give Time and Distance.

Fourth: Let us assume that OU-2 did achieve Time and Distance against YSU-2. If there is contact between YSU-2 and OU-2 and OU is knocked down, there is no foul as long as YSU-2 stops upon contact and does not continue running through OU-2.

The words above in red are the key to setting screens (offensive or defensive) against a moving player. Physics tell us that when we have a completely elastic collision that the momentum (P) of the system must be the same before and after the collision. Collisions between human bodies are not elastic but can be considered inelastic. That means it is very difficult for the screened player to stop instantly upon contact. I cannot remember that last time I saw a screened player in this circumstances stopping the instant he made contact with the screener.

MTD, Sr.

[johnny d]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

First, full disclosure: Everybody knows I am a graduate of Youngstown State University.

Second: While I wish that YSU had won, they have lost too many close games this year to be worthy of going to the NCAA.

Third: I would have called an illegal screen on OU-2 because he did not give Time and Distance.

Fourth: Let us assume that OU-2 did achieve Time and Distance against YSU-2. If there is contact between YSU-2 and OU-2 and OU is knocked down, there is no foul as long as YSU-2 stops upon contact and does not continue running through OU-2.

The words above in red are the key to setting screens (offensive or defensive) against a moving player. Physics tell us that when we have a completely elastic collision that the momentum (P) of the system must be the same before and after the collision. Collisions between human bodies are not elastic but can be considered inelastic. That means it is very difficult for the screened player to stop instantly upon contact. I cannot remember that last time I saw a screened player in this circumstances stopping the instant he made contact with the screener.

MTD, Sr.

Mark, you are only partially correct. The rule states the player running through the screen has to stop or attempt to stop. I am sure the people who wrote the rule realize there is no way the screened player can instantly stop once he makes contact. If the screen was legal, this should be considered incidental contact.

Originally Posted by johnny d

Mark, you are only partially correct. The rule states the player running through the screen has to stop or attempt to stop. I am sure the people who wrote the rule realize there is no way the screened player can instantly stop once he makes contact. If the screen was legal, this should be considered incidental contact.

Can't we use the same ""to" versus "to and through" language to officiate this play?

I have a defensive foul for running through the (in my opinion) legal screen.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by AremRed

Can't we use the same ""to" versus "to and through" language to officiate this play?

I have a defensive foul for running through the (in my opinion) legal screen.

Legal screen?

[maroonx]

Anyone agree Bader's step back dribble behind the 3point arc is a travel violation?

[ballgame99]

Originally Posted by maroonx

Anyone agree Bader's step back dribble behind the 3point arc is a travel violation?

No, he still has his dribble when he takes the step back and gathers while airborne. Legal jump stop.

Originally Posted by maroonx

dribble

Originally Posted by maroonx

travel violation

Just think about having both these phrases in the same sentence.

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Legal screen?

Yes, that's what I wrote? You sound confused?

[johnny d]

He and others would be confused because the screen was not legal.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by maroonx

Anyone agree Bader's step back dribble behind the 3point arc is a travel violation?

Nope (assuming it is the play by #3 on the right end of the court on the far side that occurred shortly after the illegal screen part of the ciip).

I don't think he picked up the ball until after he jumped...allowing him to land on either or both feet.