With all that contact, wouldn't you have something? I agree, it is a legal screen. In our area, we were instructed to watch for teams blowing up screens. I believe this clip meets that criteria. Shouldn't the defender be punished with a foul?

pfan

This for me. I think our angle on the reply was better than what the calling official had, so I don't think the left arm came into play on her call at all.

+1

The level of contact has nothing to do with the legality of a screen. If a screener is setting a legal screen, it certainly cannot be a foul on the player setting the screen for sure. And the only one technically displaced is the defender and that would only be a foul if you determine they were not given the correct time and distance.

Peace

How does this play fit the definition of "blowing up the screen"??

The only thing blown up here is the defender...

I stopped reading here. If you're starting with a premise that "all that contact" should be part of your criteria, then you're doing it wrong.

Illegal. Not enough time/distance given for the defender, screener was still moving forward within that window.

Did she in anyway blow up the screener before getting knocked on her ass?

Not sure what that has to do with it being legal or not.

It doesn't from our point of view. But if you are going to call a screen illegal because of the amount of contact, then it does matter why that contact took place. It is not a foul just because the contact is violent or severe on the player setting the screen. And he was responding to the comment that suggested a foul was illegal only because of the nature of contact, not the legality of the screen.

Peace

What did the defender do wrong?

Slo-mo of the slo-mo (video)
 

There weren't any other angles of the play but here's a slo-mo of the slo-mo so we can comparison shop...


<iframe width="853" height="480" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/H1E8PuMvT3c?rel=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Illegal Screen ...
 

Agree. Watching this video over, and over, including some stop action, I believe that from the time that the screener stopped moving forward, the defender was allowed about 7/8 of a step to change direction, and attempt to avoid contact with the screener. At the speed that the defender was moving, I believe that the screener should have allowed the defender the two step maximum (dictated by rule), allowing the defender the time, and distance, to change direction, and attempt to avoid contact with the screener.

I don't see a problem with the forearm. Bad angle for me, and maybe the screener was just protecting herself, or maybe the forearm moved up as a result of the impact resulting from the contact.

I'm gender neutral on this. I'm calling it the same way in a boys, or girls, game.

Agree ...
 

... and it amazes me that we can get anything right, on the court, in a real game, in real time.

How do we all do it? And get paid for doing it? And get invited back to do more games?

Or this version of the question: What did Diggins do to put Langhorne at a disadvantage?