PDA

View Full Version : What is and is not legal on a screen?



Scoots
05-11-2016, 11:09 PM
From the NBA rulebook:

A screen is the legal action of a player who, without causing undue contact, delays or prevents an opponent from reaching a desired position.

A player who sets a screen shall not (1) assume a position nearer than a normal step from an opponent, if that opponent is stationary and unaware of the screener’s position, or (2) make illegal contact with an opponent when he assumes a position at the side or front of an opponent, or (3) assume a position so near to a moving opponent that he is not given an opportunity to stop and/or change direction before making illegal contact, or (4) move laterally or toward an opponent being screened, after having assumed a legal position. The screener may move in the same direction and path of the opponent being screened.

From nba.com:

A screen or pick is when an offensive player gets to a legal position on the court in the path of a defender for the purpose of slowing down the defender or making him change direction. An illegal screen/pick is when the defender does not get into a legal position. When picking a stationary opponent from the backside, you must give that player a step to stop and /or change direction since he cannot see you. If the opponent is moving, you must get to your position and give him enough distance to stop and/or change direction. The speed of the player will determine the distance. You cannot just jump in front of a player at the last second.

Most of the illegal screens I see called are one of two things:
1. The screener moves laterally into the path of a defender when the defender is within 1 step of the screener.
2. The screeners feet are farther apart than their shoulders. As far as I can tell that is not a written rule but a "point of emphasis" with the refs.

A lot of the complaints I hear about illegal screens that are actually legal are:
1. The screener has to be set when the defender is at least 1 step away from them. For someone running at near full speed, one step is pretty close, and very hard to judge when the screener was "set" and when the defender got into that last step.
2. The screener does NOT have to stay still after setting the screen and the defender gets within that 1 step. The screener is allowed to move in the same direction the defender is moving whether there is contact or not.
3. The screener sets, then moves, then re-sets before the player gets within that last step.

Most of the missed illegal screen calls are:
1. Screeners moving laterally after contact, or even worse moving at a defender.
2. Holding.
3. Screener pivoting toward the basket mid-screen. This was a "point of emphasis" some years ago but the refs have slowly stopped calling it.

I think the rule is poorly written and hard to officiate, and the current trend to take advantage of that is the moving the same direction as the defender because it allows a screener to work like a pulling guard and just keep blocking and blocking and blocking ... even though it's legal.

Thoughts?

IBleedPurple
05-12-2016, 01:13 AM
Don't ask Draymond

Scoots
05-12-2016, 01:37 AM
Don't ask Draymond

I think he knows very carefully what he can get away with and what the rules are.

When asked about it Bogut said:


People are just trying to take away the season we’re having No. 1 and the season Steph (Curry’s) having. They’re looking for any excuse. ‘Oh, Steph wouldn’t get those shots in the ‘80s.’ Or ‘Steph wouldn’t get those shots in the 90s.’ Or ‘blah blah blah blah blah.’ They’re all straw man arguments that are pointless.

Do we set hard screens? Yeah, we put pressure on the officials. They call us for moving screens. I’ve been called for many moving screens. Then we adjust. But every smart team in the league knows…I wouldn’t say we’re going out there moving. We’re going out and setting hard screens, and you figure out how the referees are going to officiate the game. I mean, if you have Steph Curry on your team, would you not try to knock his man on his (behind) as much as you can to get him wide-open threes? Everyone in the league would say ‘yes.’ I mean, people starting all this stuff, I think it’s just because of the success we’ve had.

Saddletramp
05-12-2016, 01:49 AM
And part of that success, Bogut, is you and Draymond acting like a blind side blocker or pulling guard.

Not sure why you're bringing this up again, Scoots. Most everybody has already given up caring at this point. I just hope that that's all we see going forward and then they might finally fix it.

CHANGO
05-12-2016, 01:52 AM
I think he knows very carefully what he can get away with and what the rules are.

When asked about it Bogut said:

Those aren't the rules. A lot of DG and AB screens are illegal. You can't argue that, everyone knows it, heck, I KNOW those refs know it too. I'm sure they check the internet everynow and then, they just don't call it.

In other words, as Bogut said they are putting pressure on the officials. Refs tend to be picky of calling a foul when a player has 5 fouls already, unless there is hard contact. I feel like that's what happens with the moving screens, they get so tired of seeing them that they just call 2 or 3 out of 10.

CHANGO
05-12-2016, 01:54 AM
I think he knows very carefully what he can get away with and what the rules are.

When asked about it Bogut said:

And BTW of course people are going to complain more because of their success, it's hard enough having to guard 2 of the best shooters of all time on the court, now you add moving screens to the task and it's a pain in the ***. Lot of people won't complain if those moving screens were made by the Sixers, because the Sixers don't have the lethal Offense the Warriors have.

Slug3
05-12-2016, 09:05 AM
A lot of people/teams get away with moving screens. If the NBA started calling them correctly then a lot of teams would adjust. But they get away with it so why fix it?

ewing
05-12-2016, 10:29 AM
it is defined based on whatever the NBA feels will boast ratings. the pulling guard analogy is a good one. the rule itself is written so lawyerly that you can interpret it anyway you want however at one time that was a moving screen and common sense should tell you that it is. on the other hand the NBA wanted to open the game more as its more "attractive" and the refs can only follow the cues given to them. At least the games are not scripted. its kind of like the WWE

IndyRealist
05-12-2016, 11:55 AM
the common sense definition is: "you have to have your feet set while the opponent can still get around you, and you cannot move." if you are on top of the defender and then stop so he runs into you, it's an offensive foul. If you move and contact the defender, it's an offensive foul.

The whole "moving in the direction the defender is moving" and "rolling to the rim while still contacting the defender" should both be illegal, even though it's allowed.

Scoots
05-12-2016, 12:25 PM
And part of that success, Bogut, is you and Draymond acting like a blind side blocker or pulling guard.

Not sure why you're bringing this up again, Scoots. Most everybody has already given up caring at this point. I just hope that that's all we see going forward and then they might finally fix it.

Not all of those "pulling guard" screens are illegal though.

I brought it up watching playoff games and seeing screens called illegal or not called so inconsistently, then in one of the 2 minute reviews a Draymond screen I thought was illegal the NBA specifically deemed legal in the 2-minute review.

Scoots
05-12-2016, 12:26 PM
Those aren't the rules. A lot of DG and AB screens are illegal. You can't argue that, everyone knows it, heck, I KNOW those refs know it too. I'm sure they check the internet everynow and then, they just don't call it.

In other words, as Bogut said they are putting pressure on the officials. Refs tend to be picky of calling a foul when a player has 5 fouls already, unless there is hard contact. I feel like that's what happens with the moving screens, they get so tired of seeing them that they just call 2 or 3 out of 10.

I never said all AB/DG screens are legal. Far from it. But knowing the rules and "what he can get away with" is part of the sport.

A lot of what casual fans call illegal moving screens are actually legal moving screens.

Scoots
05-12-2016, 12:29 PM
A lot of people/teams get away with moving screens. If the NBA started calling them correctly then a lot of teams would adjust. But they get away with it so why fix it?

This has been my point from the beginning, but I came to the conclusion that the rule is badly written and maybe impossible to enforce the same all the time which makes it even more confusing to even avid fans.

Scoots
05-12-2016, 12:59 PM
the common sense definition is: "you have to have your feet set while the opponent can still get around you, and you cannot move." if you are on top of the defender and then stop so he runs into you, it's an offensive foul. If you move and contact the defender, it's an offensive foul.

The whole "moving in the direction the defender is moving" and "rolling to the rim while still contacting the defender" should both be illegal, even though it's allowed.

Actually, theoretically if the defender is between the screener and the rim the screener is not allowed to roll to the rim.

I think you are right about what the rule SHOULD BE. Feet set, no wider than your shoulders, hands together to protect your junk, and DON'T MOVE until the defender has moved away from the screener.

CHANGO
05-12-2016, 10:53 PM
I never said all AB/DG screens are legal. Far from it. But knowing the rules and "what he can get away with" is part of the sport.

A lot of what casual fans call illegal moving screens are actually legal moving screens.

The problem is, that even you are saying that the rules for moving screens are vague. So' how can you expect the refs to know what is and what isn't a moving screen? They say "(4) move laterally or toward an opponent being screened, after having assumed a legal position."

But I've seen DG and Bogut do that on lots of screens, they set the screen and then roll with the player who is defending the ball handler, or simply they set a screen while moving to the left or right even when the defender is close and not within feet.

Scoots
05-13-2016, 12:09 AM
The problem is, that even you are saying that the rules for moving screens are vague. So' how can you expect the refs to know what is and what isn't a moving screen? They say "(4) move laterally or toward an opponent being screened, after having assumed a legal position."

But I've seen DG and Bogut do that on lots of screens, they set the screen and then roll with the player who is defending the ball handler, or simply they set a screen while moving to the left or right even when the defender is close and not within feet.

Yes, and that's why I've said multiple times that the rules are bad. I wish 100% of fouls were called 100% of the time, but the one I hear about more than any other is illegal screens ... even when they are not illegal because of the stupid rule.

One problem I have is I don't know how to make the rules clear, simple, easy to enforce, AND still allow a screen and roll or pick and roll to work in a reasonable fashion. If the screener is not allowed to move at all then the defenders will just be running into screeners as hard as is needed to make them move and thus make it an illegal screen (thus the rule allowing them to move now). If the rule says they have to stay still until the defender has taken a full step away from the screener then the roll or pop timing gets too long to be effective anymore.

How would you write the rule? Or how would you enforce the current rules?

CHANGO
05-13-2016, 12:30 AM
Yes, and that's why I've said multiple times that the rules are bad. I wish 100% of fouls were called 100% of the time, but the one I hear about more than any other is illegal screens ... even when they are not illegal because of the stupid rule.

One problem I have is I don't know how to make the rules clear, simple, easy to enforce, AND still allow a screen and roll or pick and roll to work in a reasonable fashion. If the screener is not allowed to move at all then the defenders will just be running into screeners as hard as is needed to make them move and thus make it an illegal screen (thus the rule allowing them to move now). If the rule says they have to stay still until the defender has taken a full step away from the screener then the roll or pop timing gets too long to be effective anymore.

How would you write the rule? Or how would you enforce the current rules?

I agree with you, it's funny that I see more moving screens that look normal to me being called fouls, and the blatant ones that everyone raves about being moving screens aren't called.

I really don't know because the way the rules are written is too vague and leading to refs and POV interpretation. The best way to set that rule would be "the defender can't move while setting a screen" but with the way the NBA is evolving players would be getting fouled out within 5 minutes of starting a game. :D

Saddletramp
05-13-2016, 12:50 AM
Yes, and that's why I've said multiple times that the rules are bad. I wish 100% of fouls were called 100% of the time, but the one I hear about more than any other is illegal screens ... even when they are not illegal because of the stupid rule.

One problem I have is I don't know how to make the rules clear, simple, easy to enforce, AND still allow a screen and roll or pick and roll to work in a reasonable fashion. If the screener is not allowed to move at all then the defenders will just be running into screeners as hard as is needed to make them move and thus make it an illegal screen (thus the rule allowing them to move now). If the rule says they have to stay still until the defender has taken a full step away from the screener then the roll or pop timing gets too long to be effective anymore.

How would you write the rule? Or how would you enforce the current rules?

Then it won't be as effective anymore. Boom. Solved. Some of these screens are the epitome of a foul. An act that gives one player an advantage over another. The NBA shouldn't not call stuff because it might slow a developing play down. Or they should just jet anything happen as far as screens are concerned.



Look, a few things should be called every time. You have your hands up like a lineman? It should be called. Every time. Your teammate runs by you and you jump out in front of the defender and jog in the same direction he's running? Should be called. Every time.

Scoots
05-13-2016, 12:56 AM
Then it won't be as effective anymore. Boom. Solved. Some of these screens are the epitome of a foul. An act that gives one player an advantage over another. The NBA shouldn't not call stuff because it might slow a developing play down. Or they should just jet anything happen as far as screens are concerned.



Look, a few things should be called every time. You have your hands up like a lineman? It should be called. Every time. Your teammate runs by you and you jump out in front of the defender and jog in the same direction he's running? Should be called. Every time.

I wasn't saying they should not make a call to avoid slowing a play. The rule allowing the screener to move is because the pick and roll requires the screener to move, and that rule goes back to the beginning of the pick and roll. The issue is when the screener can move.

The obvious holds should be called but that is a small number of what people complain about.

Right now defenders are not getting fouls called when they hold the screener and the ball handler and that should be enforced too.

If we are just going to change rules because they are annoying lets put hand checking back in, get rid of the 3 point line, the 3 second rule, basket interference, goal tending and really make the game simple to officiate because it will just be get the ball through the rim and we'll have real football on the court. Obviously that's absurd, and saying that an old rule should be changed and the pick and roll eliminated because officials don't know how to effectively call screens to your satisfaction is also absurd.

Saddletramp
05-13-2016, 01:12 AM
I wasn't saying they should not make a call to avoid slowing a play. The rule allowing the screener to move is because the pick and roll requires the screener to move, and that rule goes back to the beginning of the pick and roll. The issue is when the screener can move.

They should be able to move, but not at the expense of fouling the defender. If it means the pick and roll isn't as effective, then them's the breaks.


The obvious holds should be called but that is a small number of what people complain about.

One of my main gripes because it doesn't get called nearly enough.


Right now defenders are not getting fouls called when they hold the screener and the ball handler and that should be enforced too.

They should be, you're absolutely right.

Saddletramp
05-13-2016, 01:24 AM
Just saw your edit, silly pants. Stop trying to make it seem as though those blatant screens you know who (x2) do on a nightly basis don't free up their teammates way too easily. They free those guys up to where it's ridiculous. And they don't get called.

And goaltending? Hand checking? C'mon. Apples and oranges, bro. Those guys are straight up blocking defenses like they're lineman. Get the H outta here with goaltending being equivalent.

Scoots
05-13-2016, 12:55 PM
Just saw your edit, silly pants. Stop trying to make it seem as though those blatant screens you know who (x2) do on a nightly basis don't free up their teammates way too easily. They free those guys up to where it's ridiculous. And they don't get called.

And goaltending? Hand checking? C'mon. Apples and oranges, bro. Those guys are straight up blocking defenses like they're lineman. Get the H outta here with goaltending being equivalent.

The edit I did was because I totally typed the wrong word in one sentence, then I added a bit to the end ... when I started editing nobody had responded.

I have NEVER said the Warriors don't commit illegal screens so please stop saying I have. I want the rules called consistently because the players will adjust. Right now the adjustment has the players getting away with grabbing and pushing and moving into a defenders way, and that sucks too ... but as long as the officials are not calling it ANY SMART PLAYER WILL BE DOING IT THAT WAY TOO. Add to that the holding officials are allowing defenders to do on screens and it may just balance out ... even if that sucks too.

To reiterate: I'm not FOR illegal screens, I don't care who is committing them. But a lot of what is called illegal is actually within the rules.

On the goaltending/hand checking thing ... I said it was silly right in that paragraph. I didn't say it was equivalent. But you were saying to do away with the pick and roll because of illegal screens and that is too extreme so I figured I'd take it to 11 to show maybe a little bit of the absurdity of you wanting to take away a fundamental part of the game of basketball because you don't like the way screens are being officiated.

The Warriors set a whole lot of screens, every one of their players do it. Bogut and Green are particularly visible when they do it and are often illegal, but they know and admit that if the refs call it they'll stop. Because of that (and I've seen it happen in plenty of games) I don't blame them for doing it. I've seen them set screens while acting like they are boxing out for a board, meanwhile a Curry is able to walk to the rim uncontested. We need to fix the rules. 4th ref needed too so there can be 2 baseline refs and 2 outside refs.

As a side note John Stockton was one of the most vicious screeners ever and they were not only often against the NBA rules they were against the law :)

Saddletramp
05-13-2016, 01:52 PM
The edit I did was because I totally typed the wrong word in one sentence, then I added a bit to the end ... when I started editing nobody had responded

Same thing has happened to me before. Don't sweat it..


I have NEVER said the Warriors don't commit illegal screens so please stop saying I have. I want the rules called consistently because the players will adjust. Right now the adjustment has the players getting away with grabbing and pushing and moving into a defenders way, and that sucks too ... but as long as the officials are not calling it ANY SMART PLAYER WILL BE DOING IT THAT WAY TOO. Add to that the holding officials are allowing defenders to do on screens and it may just balance out ... even if that sucks too.

To reiterate: I'm not FOR illegal screens, I don't care who is committing them. But a lot of what is called illegal is actually within the rules.

What I think is stupid is to have a player set a screen at the top of the key, have his butt out an extra inch and they call it an illegal screen then on the other side of the court, Bogut lets Curry go around him then steps in front of Curry's defender and grabs him while taking a few steps back to avoid a collision and it's ok. It's so ****ing frustrating to watch and I bet it's even worse when it's happening to you if you're the player being grabbed.


On the goaltending/hand checking thing ... I said it was silly right in that paragraph. I didn't say it was equivalent. But you were saying to do away with the pick and roll because of illegal screens and that is too extreme so I figured I'd take it to 11 to show maybe a little bit of the absurdity of you wanting to take away a fundamental part of the game of basketball because you don't like the way screens are being officiated.

I know you weren't being serious but one play (goaltending) would end basketball unless they raised the rim to 15 feet, which would also, in a way, end basketball. Can't be done. The other play (pick and roll) isn't vital to the game. Sure, it's been around forever and everyone does it, but if you can't set a screen and take off to the rim in the appropriate amount of time then you need to be called for a foul every time. And absolutely no touching the defender. It'll be called a lot at the beginning but players will adjust, just so it's a more fluid game and people aren't setting illegal screens on the darn near every other play.

But those "extra step" screens aren't the ones people get upset about and complain when it comes to the Warriors. I don't care about those, I care about the "screens" where Curry runs to one corner or from one corner and Bogut or Green just step in front of the defender and raises their hands to block. I've been pretty clear that if those are legal, let's just have a zone blocking heyday and the game will be a hybrid of basketball and offensive lineman blocking. No idea how that doesn't get called with the amount of times they do it and the amount of times I hear other teams complain about it. It's simply just not basketball.


The Warriors set a whole lot of screens, every one of their players do it. Bogut and Green are particularly visible when they do it and are often illegal, but they know and admit that if the refs call it they'll stop. Because of that (and I've seen it happen in plenty of games) I don't blame them for doing it. I've seen them set screens while acting like they are boxing out for a board, meanwhile a Curry is able to walk to the rim uncontested. We need to fix the rules. 4th ref needed too so there can be 2 baseline refs and 2 outside refs.

I'm down with the fourth ref. I've thought that it's a great idea every time you bring it up. And yes, we do need to fix the rules. I like to watch great offense just as much as the next guy but defenses have been hand-tied over so many things over the years and then you just let the offense get away with this too? Starting to get ridiculous. Curry and Klay don't need the screens to hit three-point shots and it's like watching them during warm-up practice when they get that wide open. And they are getting that wide open because somebody stepped right in front of their defender and grabbed them and it's just painful to watch.

We've had this convo a few times and I've been pretty clear that things need to be changed and you have been too so I don't know why we're still arguing about it.


As a side note John Stockton was one of the most vicious screeners ever and they were not only often against the NBA rules they were against the law :)

Don't forget his hundreds of phantom assists that he'd miraculously only get at home. :)

Scoots
05-13-2016, 02:47 PM
What I think is stupid is to have a player set a screen at the top of the key, have his butt out an extra inch and they call it an illegal screen then on the other side of the court, Bogut lets Curry go around him then steps in front of Curry's defender and grabs him while taking a few steps back to avoid a collision and it's ok. It's so ****ing frustrating to watch and I bet it's even worse when it's happening to you if you're the player being grabbed.

I guess my only answer to that is that as long as the refs are calling it even on a technical level then players have a history of understanding that. So if the grabbing is being called the same both ways then it's fair game for that game. The late hip check like things have been a point of emphasis the last couple years so the players should know not to do them by now.


I know you weren't being serious but one play (goaltending) would end basketball unless they raised the rim to 15 feet, which would also, in a way, end basketball. Can't be done.

Actually, goaltending is not against the rules in Euroleague and they still play basketball. I know they don't have the same level of athlete there as the NBA does, but it's possible to play that way, it just means bigs have to block out bigs as the shot goes up to protect against the goaltend too.


The other play (pick and roll) isn't vital to the game. Sure, it's been around forever and everyone does it, but if you can't set a screen and take off to the rim in the appropriate amount of time then you need to be called for a foul every time. And absolutely no touching the defender. It'll be called a lot at the beginning but players will adjust, just so it's a more fluid game and people aren't setting illegal screens on the darn near every other play.

But those "extra step" screens aren't the ones people get upset about and complain when it comes to the Warriors. I don't care about those, I care about the "screens" where Curry runs to one corner or from one corner and Bogut or Green just step in front of the defender and raises their hands to block. I've been pretty clear that if those are legal, let's just have a zone blocking heyday and the game will be a hybrid of basketball and offensive lineman blocking. No idea how that doesn't get called with the amount of times they do it and the amount of times I hear other teams complain about it. It's simply just not basketball.

The Pick and Roll is the single most common action called in the NBA by a huge margin. If they fundamentally changed it by forcing the screener to stand stock still for another couple beats it would have a significant effect on the game. What they need to do is have a rule that allows that play to be run right, but not allow all the other BS that is now being allowed. I just don't know how that rule is written.


I'm down with the fourth ref. I've thought that it's a great idea every time you bring it up. And yes, we do need to fix the rules. I like to watch great offense just as much as the next guy but defenses have been hand-tied over so many things over the years and then you just let the offense get away with this too? Starting to get ridiculous. Curry and Klay don't need the screens to hit three-point shots and it's like watching them during warm-up practice when they get that wide open. And they are getting that wide open because somebody stepped right in front of their defender and grabbed them and it's just painful to watch.

We've had this convo a few times and I've been pretty clear that things need to be changed and you have been too so I don't know why we're still arguing about it.

I don't think we are arguing :) I think we are just talking about the vagaries of NBA officiating and the rulebook. It's been clear to me for a long time that we agree fundamentally about what we WANT in officiating. I just don't know quite how to get it.


Don't forget his hundreds of phantom assists that he'd miraculously only get at home. :)

I saw somewhere last year a list of highest home/away stat discrepancies. I was heartened to see that the Warriors were one of the more consistent franchises in that area, but some of the differences were absolutely shocking. I wish I could remember the rest of the list though.

DboneG
05-13-2016, 03:04 PM
All of this screen stuff is subjective. It's what ever the ref want to call. You see guys moving, slightly sticking arms out...all kinds of crap. A guy is not supposed to move when setting a screen. But, they do, all the time.

Saddletramp
05-13-2016, 03:34 PM
I guess my only answer to that is that as long as the refs are calling it even on a technical level then players have a history of understanding that. So if the grabbing is being called the same both ways then it's fair game for that game. The late hip check like things have been a point of emphasis the last couple years so the players should know not to do them by now.



Actually, goaltending is not against the rules in Euroleague and they still play basketball. I know they don't have the same level of athlete there as the NBA does, but it's possible to play that way, it just means bigs have to block out bigs as the shot goes up to protect against the goaltend too.



The Pick and Roll is the single most common action called in the NBA by a huge margin. If they fundamentally changed it by forcing the screener to stand stock still for another couple beats it would have a significant effect on the game. What they need to do is have a rule that allows that play to be run right, but not allow all the other BS that is now being allowed. I just don't know how that rule is written.



I don't think we are arguing :) I think we are just talking about the vagaries of NBA officiating and the rulebook. It's been clear to me for a long time that we agree fundamentally about what we WANT in officiating. I just don't know quite how to get it.



I saw somewhere last year a list of highest home/away stat discrepancies. I was heartened to see that the Warriors were one of the more consistent franchises in that area, but some of the differences were absolutely shocking. I wish I could remember the rest of the list though.

When I hear the word goaltending, I think of before the ball comes down the first time. When I think of Euroleague goaltending I think of off the rim. Huge difference. If you were meaning the off the rim variety than I wouldn't be as opposed to that but I don't see it happening anytime soon. My bad.

And again, the pick and roll stuff is not something I stress over as much as the dirty blocking that those guys get away with a lot. It's just blatantly awful while the bit-too-quick step off of the pick is a little harder to judge. In fact, I wouldn't care enough to complain about any of them if the blatant ones were called. It's like watching a game where the bigs are just banging and beating the crap out of each other down low and nothing is called but a tickytack touch foul on the perimeter is called that has nothing to do with giving anyone an advantage. Don't call a minor foul if you're allowing wrestling matches inside.

CHANGO
05-13-2016, 04:25 PM
All of this screen stuff is subjective. It's what ever the ref want to call. You see guys moving, slightly sticking arms out...all kinds of crap. A guy is not supposed to move when setting a screen. But, they do, all the time.

That's what I'm saying, the problem is that refs are not consistent enough. They call a moving screen on Biyombo for moving a little but ignore a moving screen by Green when he is moving with the damn defender.

Scoots
05-13-2016, 04:30 PM
When I hear the word goaltending, I think of before the ball comes down the first time. When I think of Euroleague goaltending I think of off the rim. Huge difference. If you were meaning the off the rim variety than I wouldn't be as opposed to that but I don't see it happening anytime soon. My bad.

And again, the pick and roll stuff is not something I stress over as much as the dirty blocking that those guys get away with a lot. It's just blatantly awful while the bit-too-quick step off of the pick is a little harder to judge. In fact, I wouldn't care enough to complain about any of them if the blatant ones were called. It's like watching a game where the bigs are just banging and beating the crap out of each other down low and nothing is called but a tickytack touch foul on the perimeter is called that has nothing to do with giving anyone an advantage. Don't call a minor foul if you're allowing wrestling matches inside.

I wasn't clear either. Sorry. Stern wanted the NBA to adopt the FIBA goaltending rules but he couldn't push it through.

I totally agree on the bizarre inconsistency of officiating on physical contact. It should be called the same inside and out and the same regardless of the team or the players involved.

One thing that has bugged me this last year (and I know this is a complaint only for teams who are winning big a lot) is how drastically officiating changes in a blowout. Suddenly the team that is up gets no calls either way and the team that's down can do almost whatever they want. Somehow a 20 point lead late in the 3rd turns the game into a wrestling match too.

Scoots
05-13-2016, 04:31 PM
All of this screen stuff is subjective. It's what ever the ref want to call. You see guys moving, slightly sticking arms out...all kinds of crap. A guy is not supposed to move when setting a screen. But, they do, all the time.

The rules explicitly allow them to move. It's just HOW they move and the direction they move that is poorly enforced.

Scoots
05-13-2016, 04:36 PM
That's what I'm saying, the problem is that refs are not consistent enough. They call a moving screen on Biyombo for moving a little but ignore a moving screen by Green when he is moving with the damn defender.

I think that is one of the key things that is wrong with the rule. They are allowed to move with the defender and call it legal which makes it the "pulling guard" thing. If the defender bumped the screener then changed direction the screener is not supposed to be allowed to change direction and get back in front of the defender, but I seldom see defenders do that and put the screener at risk. They just keep running in a straight line which helps the screener stay with them. Also if the defender did NOT contact the screener and literally ran around the screen then the screener can't move back in front of the defender as easily within the rules.

This rule is broken by everybody, but I've seen the Warriors run 7 screens on one possession so it REALLY stands out as a major issue.

CHANGO
05-13-2016, 04:56 PM
I think that is one of the key things that is wrong with the rule. They are allowed to move with the defender and call it legal which makes it the "pulling guard" thing. If the defender bumped the screener then changed direction the screener is not supposed to be allowed to change direction and get back in front of the defender, but I seldom see defenders do that and put the screener at risk. They just keep running in a straight line which helps the screener stay with them. Also if the defender did NOT contact the screener and literally ran around the screen then the screener can't move back in front of the defender as easily within the rules.

This rule is broken by everybody, but I've seen the Warriors run 7 screens on one possession so it REALLY stands out as a major issue.

If you go to the NBA last 2 minutes reports, you can see what is the problem. (they have videos on every explanation)

They say Valanciunas committed a moving screen because he extended his leg while setting the screen, but when he does the same thing with his elbows, it's not a moving screen.

Green uses a lot that "Pulling the guard with him" technique, I don't see a problem when the guard stays there with him, but most of the time the guards try to keep going their way to stop Curry and Green prevent that by moving, that is illegal.

The Bogut technique is just walking backwards (Green uses this one too but Bogut is the master) and again, that prevents the defender from going where he wants to go.