|
Hello, all.
I've been reading the boards here for about a year without posting, and I wanted all of you to know how much enjoyment and valuable knowledge I have gotten out of all of your Q&As, editorials, jokes, etc.
Now I have something I'd like for you to chew on with me.
Recent situation. A1 and B1 are both going after a rebound. Each is able to get a hand on the ball, but is only able to tip it into the air. Finally, with the ball still overhead, A1 pushes B1 away and secures the rebound easily.
Easy foul on A1. The play happened in front of A's bench. The coach jumps up to claim that A1 had in fact gotten his hands on the ball (presumably possessed by B1), and had "pushed," as opposed to stripping the ball (I have no idea what the coach was seeing, but I think his delusion may yet yield fruit). That was all he said. I assume his argument was that, although the transfer of A1's momentum through the ball did indeed cause B1 to be separated from the ball and fall, it was a legal act.
Would you guys have anything here? I tried to come up with similar situations, and I thought about A1 going up for a shot, and B1 coming down hard ON THE BALL, causing A1 to be disadvantaged. Clearly no call here (other than a possible tie-up), but I couldn't decided whether my original case play might fall under the 'rough tactics' clause in the NFHS foul definition.
JB
-----------------------
1991, 1992, 2001, 2002?
|