Moving Screen

[Zeke]

Back in the day it was the job of the screener to set the screen and the job of the driver to accept the screen or reject it. If the driver accepted it he was to brush up against the screen as he drove.
It seems the drivers are not driving close enough to the screener and the screener tries to make up the gap. I still have teeth marks on my butt for moving on a screen.
Have the coaching theories changed on setting the screen and the responsibilities of boh screener and driver? Miles got called twice yesterday and Brian use to get called frequently.

[Ichabod Drain]

Back in the day it was the job of the screener to set the screen and the job of the driver to accept the screen or reject it. If the driver accepted it he was to brush up against the screen as he drove.
It seems the drivers are not driving close enough to the screener and the screener tries to make up the gap. I still have teeth marks on my butt for moving on a screen.
Have the coaching theories changed on setting the screen and the responsibilities of boh screener and driver? Miles got called twice yesterday and Brian use to get called frequently.

I highly doubt they are coaching it any differently now. The first foul Miles got yesterday was definately a foul but the second was not. By definition it may have been a foul but it was the kind of foul that happens on almost every possesion and never gets called. I'm guessing maybe after the first one the referee got it in his head to keep an eye out for it again.

But as I said before i highly doubt the coaching theory of it has changed.

[DukieInBrasil]

Back in the day it was the job of the screener to set the screen and the job of the driver to accept the screen or reject it. If the driver accepted it he was to brush up against the screen as he drove.
It seems the drivers are not driving close enough to the screener and the screener tries to make up the gap. I still have teeth marks on my butt for moving on a screen.
Have the coaching theories changed on setting the screen and the responsibilities of boh screener and driver? Miles got called twice yesterday and Brian use to get called frequently.

Absolutely correct. The guards are not using the screener correctly and are leaving a gap that is far too wide between them, this is what gives the big the urge to move laterally to "rub" the defender off.

[Devilsfan]

I'll take it with pleasure as long as he leads a break and finishes with authority. He was moving more last night than I've seen in 4 years. Keep up the great play Miles, we need it!

[-bdbd]

I highly doubt they are coaching it any differently now. The first foul Miles got yesterday was definately a foul but the second was not. By definition it may have been a foul but it was the kind of foul that happens on almost every possesion and never gets called. I'm guessing maybe after the first one the referee got it in his head to keep an eye out for it again.

But as I said before i highly doubt the coaching theory of it has changed.

Moving screens are often just simply "judgement" calls. Both were close, and could have gone uncalled, but neither seemed out of left field either. My gripe is with ref consistency. Look, every crew calls a game a little uniquely. K recognizes that and coaches to the game's reffing style each time out (I have heard Bilas and other speak to this point - part of what makes K great). But you have to be able to count on their consistency within a given game, and at both ends of the court. Go back and look at the last ten seconds of the game and tell me that Capel doesn't get hit with a moving pick even more blatant than the Miles calls. Problem was they just often won't call it in a game-ending circumstance like that - kinda like the body blow Singler took in the final few seconds of the NC game two years ago vs Butler.

[DoubleDuke Dad]

Moving screens are often just simply "judgement" calls. Both were close, and could have gone uncalled, but neither seemed out of left field either. My gripe is with ref consistency. Look, every crew calls a game a little uniquely. K recognizes that and coaches to the game's reffing style each time out (I have heard Bilas and other speak to this point - part of what makes K great). But you have to be able to count on their consistency within a given game, and at both ends of the court. Go back and look at the last ten seconds of the game and tell me that Capel doesn't get hit with a moving pick even more blatant than the Miles calls. Problem was they just often won't call it in a game-ending circumstance like that - kinda like the body blow Singler took in the final few seconds of the NC game two years ago vs Butler.

Yes, that is exactly what I saw. Curry was knocked to the floor not because he ran into the screen but because the screener blatantly ran into him.

[DukeDevilDeb]

Moving screens are often just simply "judgement" calls. Both were close, and could have gone uncalled, but neither seemed out of left field either. My gripe is with ref consistency. Look, every crew calls a game a little uniquely. K recognizes that and coaches to the game's reffing style each time out (I have heard Bilas and other speak to this point - part of what makes K great). But you have to be able to count on their consistency within a given game, and at both ends of the court. Go back and look at the last ten seconds of the game and tell me that Capel doesn't get hit with a moving pick even more blatant than the Miles calls. Problem was they just often won't call it in a game-ending circumstance like that - kinda like the body blow Singler took in the final few seconds of the NC game two years ago vs Butler.

Did you mean Curry?

[MCFinARL]

Moving screens are often just simply "judgement" calls. Both were close, and could have gone uncalled, but neither seemed out of left field either. My gripe is with ref consistency. Look, every crew calls a game a little uniquely. K recognizes that and coaches to the game's reffing style each time out (I have heard Bilas and other speak to this point - part of what makes K great). But you have to be able to count on their consistency within a given game, and at both ends of the court. Go back and look at the last ten seconds of the game and tell me that Capel doesn't get hit with a moving pick even more blatant than the Miles calls. Problem was they just often won't call it in a game-ending circumstance like that - kinda like the body blow Singler took in the final few seconds of the NC game two years ago vs Butler.

Probably serves him right for being on the court in the first place!

[MChambers]

Moving screens are often just simply "judgement" calls. Both were close, and could have gone uncalled, but neither seemed out of left field either. My gripe is with ref consistency. Look, every crew calls a game a little uniquely. K recognizes that and coaches to the game's reffing style each time out (I have heard Bilas and other speak to this point - part of what makes K great). But you have to be able to count on their consistency within a given game, and at both ends of the court. Go back and look at the last ten seconds of the game and tell me that Capel doesn't get hit with a moving pick even more blatant than the Miles calls. Problem was they just often won't call it in a game-ending circumstance like that - kinda like the body blow Singler took in the final few seconds of the NC game two years ago vs Butler.

Jeff still has eligibility?

[Zeke]

Moving screens are often just simply "judgement" calls. Both were close, and could have gone uncalled, but neither seemed out of left field either. My gripe is with ref consistency. Look, every crew calls a game a little uniquely. K recognizes that and coaches to the game's reffing style each time out (I have heard Bilas and other speak to this point - part of what makes K great). But you have to be able to count on their consistency within a given game, and at both ends of the court. Go back and look at the last ten seconds of the game and tell me that Capel doesn't get hit with a moving pick even more blatant than the Miles calls. Problem was they just often won't call it in a game-ending circumstance like that - kinda like the body blow Singler took in the final few seconds of the NC game two years ago vs Butler.

That gets to my 2nd pet peeve - the "good no call". If there is a foul, it should be called. The rules should not vary from one game to the other or one part of the game to another. I have a suspicion that the refs ignore some calls because there are so many fouls it would slow down the game and eventually hurt TV revenues.

[allenmurray]

That gets to my 2nd pet peeve - the "good no call". If there is a foul, it should be called. The rules should not vary from one game to the other or one part of the game to another. I have a suspicion that the refs ignore some calls because there are so many fouls it would slow down the game and eventually hurt TV revenues.

If the refs called everything that technically is a foul games would take 5 hours. The "good no call" really translates to an official using good judgement. There is a human element to officiating.

[devildeac]

Jeff still has eligibility?

If Jeff was hit with a moving pick, he would have also been hit with a T for being out on the floor during the course of play ;-) .

[MChambers]

That gets to my 2nd pet peeve - the "good no call". If there is a foul, it should be called. The rules should not vary from one game to the other or one part of the game to another. I have a suspicion that the refs ignore some calls because there are so many fouls it would slow down the game and eventually hurt TV revenues.

I think the book is named Scorecasting, and it's sort of an economist's view of sports. As to refereeing, it suggests that officials don't want to be seen as influencing the outcome of games. Thus, in baseball, on a 3 ball, no strike count, the umpire has a wide strike zone to avoid calling a base on balls. In basketball, they tend not to call fouls in the final minutes of games. They also tend to favor stars on 50-50 balls.

I'm not defending the conduct of the officials, but I do think this is a good explanation for why this happens.

[Olympic Fan]

If the refs called everything that technically is a foul games would take 5 hours. The "good no call" really translates to an official using good judgement. There is a human element to officiating.

The rule of thumb that Fred Barakat brought to the ACC in the early 80s -- and by Hank Nichols nationally -- is whether a technical violation gives one player an advantage or not.

The refs are taught not to call "technical" violations that have no impact on play.

[DukieInBrasil]

The rule of thumb that Fred Barakat brought to the ACC in the early 80s -- and by Hank Nichols nationally -- is whether a technical violation gives one player an advantage or not.

The refs are taught not to call "technical" violations that have no impact on play.

But they call the 2 hands on the dribbler all the time, as a point of emphasis, even if it has no impact on the play. Hard fouls that physically impede a defender or rebounder tend not to get called at the end of a game, see 2002 Duke vs IU, Boozer rebound or 2010 Duke vs Butler moving screen to blast Singler out of the play or 2012 Duke vs UVa moving screen to blast Curry out of the play. I'm sure there are many thousands of other cases from other years and other teams.

[Reilly]

The rule of thumb that Fred Barakat brought to the ACC in the early 80s -- and by Hank Nichols nationally -- is whether a technical violation gives one player an advantage or not.

The refs are taught not to call "technical" violations that have no impact on play.

That's interesting. I'd heard the "is an advantage gained" language for so long now that I thought it was literally part of the definition of a foul. It's not:

Section 1. Personal Fouls
Art. 1. A player shall not hold, push, charge, trip or impede the progress of an
opponent by extending arm(s), shoulder(s), hip(s) or knee(s) or by bending his
or her own body into other than a normal position or by using any unreasonably
rough tactics.
Art. 2. A player shall not contact an opponent with his or her hand unless such
contact is only with the opponent’s hand while it is on the ball and is incidental
to an attempt to play the ball.
Art. 3. A player shall not use his or her hand(s) on an opponent to inhibit the
freedom of movement of the opponent in any way.
Art. 4. A player shall not extend the arm(s) fully or partially other than vertically
so that freedom of movement of an opponent is hindered when contact with the
arm(s) occurs.
Art. 5. A player shall not use the forearm and/or hand to prevent an opponent
from attacking the ball during a dribble or when trying for goal.
Art. 6. A player may hold his or her hand(s) and arm(s) in front of his or her own
face or body for protection and to absorb force from an imminent charge by an
opponent.
Art. 7. Contact caused by a defensive player approaching a player with the ball
from behind is pushing; contact caused by the momentum of a player who has
tried for goal is charging.
Art. 8. A dribbler shall neither charge into nor contact an opponent in the
dribbler’s path nor attempt to dribble between two opponents or between an
opponent and a boundary, unless the space is sufficient to provide a reasonable
chance for the dribbler to pass through without contact.
Art. 9. When a dribbler passes an opponent sufficiently to have head and
shoulders beyond the front of the opponent’s torso, the greater responsibility for
subsequent contact shall be that of the opponent.
Art. 10. When a dribbler has obtained a straight-line path, the dribbler may not be
bumped, pushed or otherwise crowded out of that path. When an opponent is able
to legally obtain a guarding position in that path, the dribbler shall avoid contact
by changing direction or ending the dribble.
Art. 11. The player intending to become the dribbler shall not be permitted
additional rights to start a dribble or to execute a jump try for goal, pivot or feint.
Art. 12. A secondary defender as defined in Rule 4-61 cannot establish initial
legal guarding position in the restricted area for the purpose of drawing a player
control foul/charge when defending a player who is in control of the ball (i.e.,
dribbling or shooting) or who has released the ball for a pass or try. When illegal
92 RULE 10 / FOULS AND PENALTIES
contact occurs within this Restricted Area, such contact shall be called a blocking
foul, unless the contact is a flagrant foul.
a. When illegal contact occurs by the offensive player leading with a foot or
unnatural, extended knee, or warding off with the arm, such contact shall
be called a player-control foul.
b. When a player in control of the ball stops continuous movement toward
the basket and then initiates illegal contact with a secondary defender in
the restricted area, this is a player control foul.
Art. 13. Illegal contact caused by the swinging of the elbow(s) that:
a. Results from total body movement is a common or flagrant 1 personal foul
b. Is excessive per Rule 4-36.7 is a flagrant 2 foul.
c. Occurs above the shoulders of an opponent is a flagrant 1 or flagrant 2
personal foul.
d. Occurs below the shoulders of an opponent is a common, flagrant 1 or
flagrant 2 personal foul.
Art. 14. Illegal contact with an elbow that does not involve the swinging of the
elbow shall be considered a foul unless the contact is incidental per Rule 4-40.
Art. 15. A player shall adhere to the rules pertaining to illegal contact, including
but not limited to, guarding as in Rule 4-35, rebounding as in Rule 4-55, screening
as in Rule 4-60 and verticality as in Rule 4-76.
Art. 16. A player shall not flagrantly or excessively contact an opponent while the
ball is live (includes fighting).

Rule 10, p. 91

http://www.ncaapublications.com/prod...loads/BR13.pdf

[nocilla]

If Jeff was hit with a moving pick, he would have also been hit with a T for being out on the floor during the course of play ;-) .

Well, it depends on how far the pick-setter moved. If he moves into the sideline area, where Coach Capel has the right to be, then the technical would probably have to go to Daniel Ewing.

[Reilly]

- Nice to see the arc/no charge call last night (at a crucial time for Duke, too).

- a friend complained about Virginia's last (?) timeout: Virginia made bucket, Mason got the ball quickly to inbound, and Bennett seemed to run on the court and called timeout ... my friend's sense is that refs are much more liberal these days at granting the scoring team the timeout there than they used to be ... Mason had the ball yet Virginia was awarded the timeout ... I like the international rule of timeouts only on dead balls.

[Lennies]

Miles seemed to be setting his picks with his legs spread wide. That makes it really easy to draw a foul off of him.

[greybeard]

Absolutely correct. The guards are not using the screener correctly and are leaving a gap that is far too wide between them, this is what gives the big the urge to move laterally to "rub" the defender off.

The three of you might well be correct, but I think the way the defense plays the screen set out on top for a dribbler might dictate the space the dribbler leaves between himself and the screener. When coming laterally off such a screen, the dribbler will undoubtedly encounter the screener's defender, a big space eating guy on a show. The show is designed to slow down the dribbler, so the dribbler's defender can catch up. In last night's game, UVa took the "show" up a notch--the screener's defender came way outside the screen that had been set. In that circumstance, cutting off the screener's shoulder on the dribbloe would have resulted in a charge.

The play on shows is usually for a deft dribbler to swerve a bit and nulify the show or if the impedor slides out to split the defenders and penetrate. Against UVa, the dribbler swung wide to try to blow past the help defender. Thes guys were all out committed to "stopping" the dribbler that the help defender moved even further out on the show and completely stayed with the dribbler, even bodying them up, until the dribbler's defender was completely in position to replace.

So, I do think that the dribblers in this instance were coached to go higher past the screen, try to beat the help defender or create enough confusion between the two defenders when the on ball defender caught up to be able to split the two and create a five on three situation.

UVa stopped both these options most of the time, but not without cost. It takes an awful lot out of both defenders to play that way, and to do so when Curry and Rivers made both really scramble to prevent a breakdown. Tired legs--why did that guard miss so many open threes? Also, commiting so much defense so far from the basket left Mason, and in the second half, a second low post presence, with one on one coverage. The first half Mason was relatively stationary and the long UVa guy did a great job of denial.

The second half was a different ball game. Mason became a pro-active receiver, the guys with the ball were looking for when he had or was about to break open, they got him the ball in a way that his athleticism was already put into play, already resulted in a minor defeat of his defender's best hope at defense, and UVa found themselves very vulnerable inside. K did real, real good here folks, and, to their credit, his team completely got the half time changes and executed terrifically. And, when it became helter skelter in a half court set, or when there was an obvious opening, Duke's exterior guys did not hesitate and hurt UVa badly. So,that second half, Duke scored in precisely the two ways that UVa had game-planned to defeat.

Had Mason finish that beautiful reverse move, made 50 percent of his free throws, and Kelly finished on half of the five or six good opportunities in and near the paint in the second half that were misses, Duke I think would have had mid double digits going into the last 5 to 7 minutes of the game. The Duke guys played GREAT and were doing just what they had been told to do, at least as I see it.