Quote:
|
Originally Posted by RookieDude
actuary77...
Here is Case book play 10.3.5 SITUATION:
A1 tries for a goal, and (a) B1 jumps and attempts to block the shot but instead slaps or strikes the backboard and the ball goes into the basket; or (b) B1 vibrates the ring as a result of pulling on the net and the ball does not enter the basket. RULING In (a) legal and the basket counts; and (b) a technical foul is charged to B1 and there is no basket.
COMMENT: The purpose of the rule is to penalize intentional contact with the backboard while a shot or try is involved or placing a hand on the backboard to gain an advantage. A player who strikes either backboard so frocefully it cannot be ignored because it is an attempt to draw attention to the player, or a means of venting frustration may be assessed a technical foul pursuant to Rule 10-3-7.
This may help you understand the "slapping the backboard" situations you may run into from time to time.
|
I see that this is a direct quote from the book, so I'm not arguing about the authenticity of this ruling. But I'm interested in how the decision is made to charge a T as opposed to BI in item (b). And why is this case play in that section when it doesn't appear to involve the backboard?