Foul or incidental contact?

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Coach Bill

"B1 is charged with an illegal screen against A2" So, I think it's a term the NFHS is ok with.

The term "illegal screen" is fine, but there's still no signal for it. The punch is for all team control fouls (except a player control foul, but that's a controversial topic for another thread) not just illegal screens.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

The term "illegal screen" is fine, but there's still no signal for it. The punch is for all team control fouls (except a player control foul, but that's a controversial topic for another thread) not just illegal screens.

Frankly, I don't see an issue with the terminology here. I don't see this as one of those terms that confuses people (like "moving screen") into thinking something is illegal when it's not.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Adam

Frankly, I don't see an issue with the terminology here.

Nor do I.



NFHS Signal Chart:

https://nfhs-basketball.arbitersport...010%5B1%5D.pdf

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Adam

Frankly, I don't see an issue with the terminology here. I don't see this as one of those terms that confuses people (like "moving screen") into thinking something is illegal when it's not.

Exactly. And the term is used in the casebook, which as far as I am concerned is just as good as any other terminology used in the rulebook.

Peace

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by Coach Bill

I was just concerned whether there should have been a foul or not. But, he was definitely charged for an illegal screen. The ref punched, pointing the other way while shouting "illegal". That's the extent of the mechanic(s) used, and that's standard around here for illegal screens.

Also, as an aside, I looked it up and the phrase "Illegal Screen" was used in the NFHS 2011-12 case book. Specifically:

"B1 is charged with an illegal screen against A2"

So, I think it's a term the NFHS is ok with.

Coach, the point I was trying to make, before all the drama with AremRed unfolded, was your player can be guilty of a blocking foul whether:

1- he actually set a screen or not
2- whether the dribbler used the screen or not.

Without being able to see the play, we can't tell you whether a foul occurred. But yes, it's possible.

[Coach Bill]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

Coach, the point I was trying to make, before all the drama with AremRed unfolded, was your player can be guilty of a blocking foul whether:

1- he actually set a screen or not
2- whether the dribbler used the screen or not.

Without being able to see the play, we can't tell you whether a foul occurred. But yes, it's possible.

Yeh - I understand ur point. I was just letting u know my concern was not with what he was called for, but whether any foul should have been called. I think it was one of those where a patient whistle may have let it go. But, it's hard (if not impossible) for y'all to say without video.