(03-11-2019, 03:41 PM)76lsjumb Wrote: It looked to me like the success of the Hebard/Ionescu pick-and-roll derived from one overwhelming characteristic -- the effectiveness of Hebard's hip [and, occasionally, knee] in disrupting the defender without drawing a foul call. If I recall correctly, Hebard either never got called [or got called only once] for screens that almost always involved a very well-timed and well-placed hip check. At least two of the Hull fouls, where they were called for running into Ionescu while trying to get around the screen, looked like they were set in motion by a nifty Hebard hip-check to the involved Hull at just the right time. And, even when there was no foul called on anyone, the screen either got Ionescu free for a relatively uncontested shot or set Hebard up perfectly on the roll as the defenders recovered.
For many years it has been frustrating to watch our bigs get called for illegal screens at the elbow or thereabouts due to sliding over enough to make the screen work. Ionescu and Hebard, however, worked out the timing and proximity of their screens so well that Hebard's movement was highly effective, but sufficiently subtle, so as not to draw a foul call most of the times it was employed. It would be great if we could get a duo working that well in the future...
I absolutely agree with you as to the cause, but not about the subtlety. Rather than Stanford adopting what appears to be an illegal and potentially harmful move, I'd rather get Missy or one of the other refs to explain to me why that hip check isn't called regularly. I believe I remember one where Hebard had her legs spread about 6 feet for a screen (but I watched so much basketball in a few days, I could be remembering the wrong person!). (Usually the hip checks aren't accompanied by too large a spread, but is less obvious if your hips stay inside your feet.)
Quote:Art. 2. In establishing and maintaining legal screening tactics, the screener shall:
a. Stay within her vertical plane with a stance in which the inside of the
screener's feet are no wider than shoulder width apart. The screener shall
not lean into the path of an opponent or extend her hips into that path,
even though the feet are stationary.
If, for instance, Missy interprets this rule as to mean that it is legal for the screener to thrust her hips (or knee) sideways into the path of the opponent as long as her hips (knee) don't go outside of the outside of her feet, then everyone should know this. That's not how I read the rule, but I get the impression that Missy sometimes has readings I wouldn't expect. Such a reading would allow a 3+ inch thrust which will often send the opponent into the ball handler. (By initially leaning away from screen and then thrusting into it, a screener could get a full 6" of motion that would clearly cause contact. If Missy calls that foul on the opponent, that could explain a lot.)
As everyone remembers, it was a pronounced hip check (but in the open, not on a screen) that cost Nadia one of the 4 years of college BB that she gets.
Rule change suggestion: "extend her hips" -> "extend any part of her body" (hip, knee, elbow, shoulder, ...);
A little more controversially: "lean" -> "move" A lean implies a vertical slant. One could move up, down, or laterally to move into the opponent's path. The controversy is the typical uncalled screen where a player supposedly sets a screen and then moves somewhere else (including breaking to the basket), moving into the path of the opponent, but supposedly no longer setting a screen. One of the sticky points is "what is the path of the opponent" when the opponent has to change direction in response to the movement of the screener.
![[Image: sec_network_logo.png]](http://a.espncdn.com/photo/2014/0617/sec_network_logo.png){kind=logo}
