Quote:
|
Originally Posted by BadNewsRef
Well technically, in 9.2.2sitC didn't the ball become live as soon as B1 had ball at his disposal (grabs ball and moves towards endline).
I don't think the focus of 9.2.2sitC is the cancelling of the basket (that info is superflous in my opinion), the focus is that throwing such a pass should be ruled a violation.
There have been officials in the past (myself included) who would have just blown the play dead and had B1 properly inbound the ball reasoning that the ball never became live so no violation occurred. Now with the clarification of "disposal after a made shot" by the FED, the scenario in 9.2.2sitC clearly is a violation and needs to be ruled as such.
|
Exactly.
So wouldn't going back and ruling that the ball hitting the basket support was a violation, and needs to be ruled as such? Even if time is a factor (things happening really quickly), would the time used to throw a pass downcourt, catch it, and make a layup still take more time that a ball hitting a basket support and going through that same basket?