Sun Jun 12, 2005, 05:41pm
|
|
Official Forum Member
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Canada, eh?
Posts: 1,628
|
|
Quote:
Originally posted by eventnyc
I'm not going to chime in on this just yet. I'd like your analysis of both situations and why you ruled as you did.
Play situation number 1:
Player B-2 approaches A-1 who is dribbling the ball in his front court from behind. B-2 is out of the visual field of A-1 (he doesn't have eyes behind his head). B-2, having no reasonable chance to play the ball without making contact, reaches in and hits the ball which ricochets to B-1. Minor contact is made to A-1's left hip.
RULING -
Play situation number 2:
Player B-2 approaches A-1 who is dribbling the ball in his front court from behind. B-2 is out of the visual field of A-1 (he doesn't have eyes behind his head). B-2, having no reasonable chance to play the ball without making contact, reaches in and hits the ball which ricochets out of bounds without being touched again. Minor contact is made to A-1's left hip. What if the contact was more severe?
RULING -
|
1. Gotta see it to make a call.
2. See #1.
__________________
HOMER: Just gimme my gun.
CLERK: Hold on, the law requires a five-day waiting period; we've got run a background check...
HOMER: Five days???? But I'm mad NOW!!
|