Quote:
|
Originally Posted by RonRef
Let me get this right, the defender is standing in the middle of the lane and walks up to the shooter...there is no way that I am having a double violation in this situation. Disconcertion maybe (?) I think you could sell that call here. If the shooter has the ball and the defender does what you say I may be tempted to stop the play and give the shooter a substitute throw. Rule 2.3!
|
In a whole bunch of years, I have never seen R2-3 used. That's because you can usually find an appropriate rule somewhere in the book instead. There are appropriate rules in the book to cover this situation, and Nevada has already cited them. Iow, you can't use R2-3 to over-rule another existing rule just because you personally don't agree with that rule.
You certainly could call "disconcertion" though if the defender's actions bother you that much. If the defender walks
towards the FT shooter, it certainly sounds like disconcertion to me too. You still don't have rules backing though to "stop the play" until the FT shooter has been given a chance to legally try his FT....which is 10 seconds by rule(not custom)....if the defender doesn't actually interfere with the FT. Disconcertion is a judgement call, and therefore is defensible. Using R2-3 isn't defensible in this case.