Quote:
Originally posted by rockyroad
...basically what we are being told here in WA is that if the defender gets steam-rolled, we aren't going to call it a block simply because his/her left big toe was touching a line. That's not the intent of the rule...
|
Rocky, that sureashell IS the intent of the rule, whether any of us or you agree with them or not. The FED has posted the way that they want this play called on their web site, and they've posted it more than once. They changed the rules language in R4-23-3(a) to emphasize that the defender MUST have inbounds status too. As a matter of fact, they re-posted the exact same case play 2 days ago. If you go back to the link that I posted, take a look at the bottom of the left-hand column. You will see " 2004-05 NFHS Basketball Rules Interpretations- Release Date: 11/7/03". Click on that and look at Situation 7(a). That was the first time that it was posted and again it says that if the defender has one foot only
touching the OOB boundary line, the ruling is that it HAS to be a blocking foul if contact is made. It states very plainly that B1 may NOT be touching OOB. The FED couldn't have made this call any easier or plainer.
Call it what you want, podner, but the FED has issued their interpretation of this play, and your state interpreters are now telling your officials NOT to follow the FED interpretation. Correct?
[Edited by Jurassic Referee on Nov 9th, 2004 at 02:45 PM]