Quote:
Originally posted by Jurassic Referee
Quote:
Originally posted by rainmaker
Quote:
Originally posted by Back In The Saddle
As to it being good defense, if you are saying it's "good defense" for B to knock the ball away from A by hitting A's hand while it's on the ball, we have very different definitions of good defense. How can you call B hitting A intentionally good defense?
|
I'm not talking about hitting. I guess I'm not making myself clear. I'm talking about the play where B tries to tap? bump? guide? the ball away from A, and in the process B provides the force for the ball to go oob, but does it without ever touching the ball. It's a play on the ball, and the contact is incidental to the play, and A is the last one to touch, so B gets the ball for a throw-in. What's not to like?
|
It's kinda hard imo to say the contact was "incidental" when B ended up gaining a definite advantage from the contact.
Incidental contact is something that doesn't affect a play. I don't think you can say that about B's contact in this particular play. The contact made A lose possession of the ball.
That's what I don't like and that's why I wouldn't give B the ball for a throw-in.
|
Incidental contact is contact that would, by the letter of the rule, be a foul but is deemed no so because it had no effect.
The hand/ball situation, by the letter of the rule, is not incidental contact, it's simply not an infraction of the rules in any way.
The fact that B might gain an advantage in this situation involving contact is not relevant either. The contact involved is clearly specified as legal contact. Therefore, and advantage gained by B is intended by the rules.
[Edited by Camron Rust on Jul 17th, 2005 at 03:10 AM]