Quote:
Originally Posted by bob jenkins
... it's impractical ...
|
I find that by pushing rules to the limits, one can gain great incite into rules language (if one is not limited by what the NFHS publishes, or doesn't publish).
I'm the one who is often criticized by those who believe that my "twists and turns" in the same thread confuse things.
But it's not the case here.
This thread has a common theme of, "What's the location status of the ring compared to the backboard?", and every situation noted by bob jenkins pushes that point further along.
I find this thread to be fun and educationally invigorating, but we should prepare ourselves to never get any closure here, unless a "Mighty Mouse" shows up to "save the day" with an overlooked rule or casebook play citation (Nevaderef's area of expertise).
Or we may have to end up using "purpose and intent", and that's often very subjective.
And then we may have a problem comparing a "real" game call to a written test question.
