Quote:
Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.
Quote:
Originally posted by daves
Quote:
Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.
The following definition of wrist is found in Webster's New World Dictionary of Americal English, Third Edition, Copyright 1988:
wrist (rist) n.: 1: the joint or part of the arm between the hand and the forearm; carpus.
The arm is made up of two parts: lower arm and upper arm.
The lower arm is connected to the hand by the wrist.
Which means the wrist is not part of the hand.
|
You gave me the definition for wrist not hand. I have given you 2 reputable definitions of hand as including the wrist. Look up hand and you will find that it includes the wrist. Might I suggest Taber's Cyclopedic Medical Dictionary and dictionary.com.
|
Hold a basketball in your hands. Your wrist will not be in contact with the ball. If the offensive player's hand is in contact with the all and a defensive player hits the offensive player's hand it is not a foul, but if the defender hits the offensive player's wrist the defensive player has committed a foul. The wrist in NOT part of the hand and it has never been considered part of the hand per NFHS and NCAA rules.
In 31 years of basketball officiating I have never heard anybody say the it is not a foul by a defensive player when the hit an offensvie player on the wrist of the hand which in contact with the ball. And there is a reason for that. It is a foul. I am sorry if I sound a little touchy but I am really tired of some of the nonsense that is being promoted by some officials that are devoid of logic and have no basis in the rules.
|
We're probably beating a dead horse here. Put one finger on the very end portion of your forearm(radius or ulna will suffice). Now move your finger 1 centimeter down toward your fingers. Your finger is now on your hand. Next question is where did your writst go? You didn't move from your radius or ulna to your wrist and then to your hand. The wrist is part of the hand. You told us in a previous post that you were sure there was a casebook reference saying the wrist is not part of the hand. What I'm wanting is that casebook reference please. Like I said previously, I looked all through the casebook 3 times and can't find it.
I think what really irritates me most about all this the accusations made toward officials being lazy for passing on contact that could or could not be a foul. We do that all the time as officials. It's called judgment. To categorically say that the contact was a foul when you weren't officiating the game and certainly have limited information about the contact is just plain wrong! If you're trying to say that you have never used your judgment in a game and passed on contact then I say there is a lot more of that horse manure going around.