Tue Feb 17, 2004, 02:09pm
|
|
Huck Finn
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 3,347
|
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.
Quote:
Originally posted by tomegun
Quote:
Originally posted by RookieDude
[BI've called this twice in 15 years...and I hate to say, I missed it both times. I didn't let it go...I called BI. I sold it, (and of course the one Coach wanted it) but I'm going to have to change my thinking untill they change the rule.
|
I've seen this called this way often and it is flat out wrong. By rule it is a T. Like someone else said, how can you be so sure the basket would have counted? The ball can do strange things and we goaltending and BI as ways we can count a basket. I think adding this would push our judgement to the limit and would be unfair.
|
Are you talking about the original play, where the touching of the backboard was unintentional? If you are, then the rule is quite specific (see the COMMENT in the Casebook Play that I referenced), this is nothing and therefore not a technical foul. While the ball in the Casebook play went through the basket and the ball in the play in this thread did not, the point that the Casebook Play COMMENT is saying is if the contact with the backboard is not intentional then there is no infraction of the rules.
MTD, Sr. [/B]
|
I agree with you. My comments above are about me seeing officials call the intentional slapping of the backboard BI and counting the basket. That is what is wrong.
|