Quote:
Originally posted by Daryl H. Long
Jurassic.
I like it when people ask honest questions like you did and I do appreciate the humor in the MTD zinger.
The 3 KEYS as I see it to the whole thread is that the player is already AIRBORNE, B did not establish legal guarding position, and that B was not entitled to that place on the floor. There is nothing A can do to change the fact that contact is going to occur because of B not gaining legal guarding position. A had the right to come down to the floor unimpeded. OC said the ref called a block and I believe that to be correct. I have applied both 10.6.1 and the rules noted to determine block/charge in Points of Emphasis on page 71 of Rule Book.
To answer your question I did not ignore the CONTACT concepts as stated in 10.6.1. The guard in all the scenarios mentioned has LEGAL GUARDING POSITION and is entitled to their space on the floor. Then I agree that that if the dribbler or the player trying for goal uses an arm/elbow to ward off an opponent and thus infringing on their space he is guilty of PC.
|
Quite simply, Daryl, legal guarding position is absolutely meaningless in this play.It means nada, zip, nothing. The shooter INITIATED illegal contact by pushing-off with an arm BEFORE LGP could come into play. You are 100% wrong, and you are also still completely ignoring a very plain and simple rules citation in R10-6-1- again:
A player may NOT use the forearm and hand to prevent an opponent from attacking the ball during a dribble OR WHEN THROWING FOR GOAL". Your citation on p71 isn't applicable either. On that page, aren't you also ignoring the little sentence that says
"contact INITIATED by the defense(on or off the ball) that involves lower body, non-vertical contact and defending a perimeter player or an airborne player, should be a block"? The defender did NOT initiate the contact in this play. The shooter did. There is nowayinhell you can call a block on this play without going completely against some very plainly written verbiage in the rulebook.