View Single Post
  #30 (permalink)  
Old Fri Aug 05, 2005, 10:03am
Jurassic Referee Jurassic Referee is offline
In Memoriam
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Hell
Posts: 20,211
Re: The definition of leaving the court

Quote:
Originally posted by Back In The Saddle
In all of the discussion so far we haven't gotten too specific about how a player actually violates. I'm left wondering what the definition of leaving the court is. If a player touches the oob line, has he left the court, Does he need to be entirely oob to qualify? Is one foot entirely oob sufficient? What exactly is the definition of this new violation?

The committee's emphasis on playing the game on the court has previously focused on whether a defender is touching the oob line and how that affects block/charge. Surely the committee doesn't intend that any time anybody steps on any oob line they have left the court and have violated? Do they?

How exactly does a player leave the court?
The rule covers leaving the court for an unauthorized reason-- iow, in order to gain an illegal advantage. Under the old rule, it was never a T if a player inadvertantly stepped on a line-- only if that player deliberately went OOB to gain an advantage. The only thing that has changed is the penalty- not the reason for the rule being in the book in the first place. This kinda goes hand-in-hand also with calling an automatic block on the defender if he's standing OOB. In that case, they felt that defender was gaining an illegal advantage on defense by being OOB.

If a player goes OOB inadvertantly and comes right back in, there's no problem- and no call, just like it's always been.
Reply With Quote