Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Splute
aaahhh I knew you would come thru JR. And that is the answer I expected. I agree, this is what the rule states, no arguement. As I am learning the rules I also refer back to page 10, prior to Rule 1, where it talks about knowing the intent and purpose of the rules so that it may be intelligently applied to each play situation. That said, I believe this to be a play that you have to judge and as you state in your subsequent post.... handle with care. I would hope the intent and purpose of this rule is not to penalize the offense by removing a certain basket due to inadvertant contact with the net by a teammate.
|
If you expected that answer, why did you post incorrect criteria in the first place then?
Again, you penalize the
act. Whether a player actually intended to commit that act or not is completely irrelevant as to whether you should call BI. There might be some judgment involved as to whether the
act that was committed warrants a call or not. You can have inadvertent contact that should be called BI because it actually affected whether a ball went in or not. That
is the purpose and intent of the rule imo. You also might have contact that looks deliberate, but it also might have absolutely no effect on the play, so you ignore it. That also is the purpose and intent of the rule imo.