Drawing a Charge.............

[NNDman]

Not sure if you saw the ending of the VCU-GW game last night, but Will Wade drew up great strategy in drawing a foul on an inbounds play to get free throw opportunities to win the game. However, it was painfully obvious (to me at least) that the VCU player who drew the foul stepped out of bounds before contact was made and his foot remained out of bounds when contact was made. Can a player be out of bounds and draw such a foul call against and opponent?? I think not?

 

[bowlingref]

In high school ball it is a block if the defensive players foot is out of bounds.

 

[VAOfficial]

Also the same in college. Player must be inbounds to set a legal screen.

 

[NNDman]

So I guessing from what you are saying is the ref who made that call blew it?

 

[VAOfficial]

So I guessing from what you are saying is the ref who made that call blew it?

I reserve the term blown for a play that was seen in its entirety and a wrong conclusion was formed. Watching replay, the referee clearly didn't see the foot step out of bounds. I'd call it a missed call. Either way, yes it should have been a foul on the team inbounding.

 

[White hat]

Did the final interpretation come out? I asked three college officials who said there was going to be an interp issued soon because the rule book doesn't actually say one way or the other. They said the rule is clear that someone touching out of bounds cannot draw a charge, but it doesn't mention setting a screen. It doesn't mention that situation at all. Common sense says you have to be inbounds to set a screen, but the rules writers seemed to have never throught of the possibility.

 

[NNDman]

Thank you all for answering. There was even a huge pic of the play in the RTD a day or two afterwards and it's obvious his left foot is out of bounds.

 

[Hampton Roads 6]

Charge or Block has always been toughest call in sports, and will always be toughest call in sports.

 

[FBRef]

In high school ball it is a block if the defensive players foot is out of bounds.

This was an offensive player setting a screen, not a defender.

Also the same in college. Player must be inbounds to set a legal screen.

Please cite the rule reference that states this.

 

[bowlingref]

This was an offensive player setting a screen, not a defender.




Please cite the rule reference that states this.

opponent.

NFHS. 2017-18 NFHS Basketball Rules Book (Kindle Location 667). NFHS. Kindle Edition.

 

[bowlingref]

opponent.

NFHS. 2017-18 NFHS Basketball Rules Book (Kindle Location 667). NFHS. Kindle Edition.

That rule says you have to have both feet on the playing court to establish legal guarding position. Should it be the same for an offensive player to have both feet in bounds?

 

[FBRef]

There is no interpretation that I'm aware of that says a screener has set an illegal screen if both feet aren't inbounds.

 

[bowlingref]

There is no interpretation that I'm aware of that says a screener has set an illegal screen if both feet aren't inbounds.

That is what our commissioner said one night in a meeting. I guess we can all be wrong on certain rules and the way they are applied.

 

[bowlingref]

This was an offensive player setting a screen, not a defender.




Please cite the rule reference that states this.

4.40.2 SITUATION: A1 sets a stationary screen with one foot on or outside a boundary line. B1 makes contact with A1 in the torso. RULING: A blocking foul is charged to A1 because a player may not be out of bounds to set a legal screen.

NFHS. 2018-19 NFHS Basketball Case Book (Kindle Locations 38-40). NFHS. Kindle Edition.

 

[FBRef]

4.40.2 SITUATION: A1 sets a stationary screen with one foot on or outside a boundary line. B1 makes contact with A1 in the torso. RULING: A blocking foul is charged to A1 because a player may not be out of bounds to set a legal screen.

NFHS. 2018-19 NFHS Basketball Case Book (Kindle Locations 38-40). NFHS. Kindle Edition.

bowlingref, that's a new case book play, added to the Case Book this year. Hence, the asterisk beside the case play. As I previously stated, there was no such interpretation last season. Glad they've clarified it.

 

[bowlingref]

bowlingref, that's a new case book play, added to the Case Book this year. Hence, the asterisk beside the case play. As I previously stated, there was no such interpretation last season. Glad they've clarified it.

I saw that it was in my new case book. Thanks for replying. Always great to learn new things.