Quote:
Originally Posted by bucky
... why can the table not be used for any assistance? That is in the rule book ... if the table does recognize it during a live ball, they may hit the horn a few times, and then the ref blows his whistle making the ball dead. In that case, where it was discovered during a live ball, it becomes irrelevant because the ref blew his whistle making the ball dead? That seems illogical.
|
Just my point.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nevadaref
10.2.2 SITUATION: With Team A leading 51 to 50, a held ball is called. A6 properly reports and enters the game. Time is then called by Team A. The clock shows two seconds remaining in the game. After play is resumed by a throw-in, the officials: (b) do not notice Team A has six players on the court. Following the throw-in, time expires. Team B now reports to the officials that Team A had six players on the court. RULING: In (b), since it was not recognized by either official, but was called to their attention after time had expired, it is too late to assess any penalty.
|
Just for laughs, change "Team B" to "table".
Can no penalty be assessed because (1) it wasn't actually observed by an on court official, or because (2) it was to late to penalize (dead ball and clock stopped)?
To me, doubling up on the reasons not to penalize is overkill and makes the ruling unclear, correct, but unclear. As a chemist, we try to change one variable at a time, otherwise we muddy the waters (I did A and B, the procedure was successful, was the procedure successful because I did A, or because I did B? Well, at least it was successful, Why? I don't know.).
Or, (3) does the change to "table" change the situation and thus the interpretation (ruling)?
I have questions. I don't have answers. Others may have answers. Still others may just have opinions.