Quote:
|
Originally Posted by cmathews
The act of shooting has nothing to do with this. If he has LGP it doesn't matter if the ballhandler is shooting or picking his nose.
Nope, when he starts his normal routine he is in the act of shooting. In this play the act of shooting starts about a step away from the contact. That is when he picks up his dribble to begin to shoot (any further out and it would have been a travel).
|
You are completely wrong on this. Go back and read the book.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by cmathews
The original poster didn't have to go to the monitor. He nailed it full speed in real time.
|
Yes, but he wasn't sure, which is my point. The video supported his call, however, how can you make a decision that's going to decide the game and you not be sure? That's my point!
Some of you have also gone with the no-call analogy on this play at the basket to decide the game. Though I do not agree with that position, I can certainly respect how you got there. The timing was such that you couldn't pick a culprit. However, I believe I have found a definitive answer to this position and my position.
Rule:4-27-5. If, however, a player approaches an opponent from behind or from an a position from which he/she has no reasonable chance to play the ball without making contact with the opponent, the responsibility is on the player in the unfavorable position.
To me, the defender was late getting there, regardless of the fact he got his feet set a split second b/4 the contact, so he is the player in the most unfavorable position, therefore, he is responsible for the contact. You certainly cannot say the offensive player is in the unfavorable position. We're also certainly bordering on incidental contact here, a no-call. In fact, I was real close to a no-call myself but I'm not letting that much of a collision go without coming up with something. My decision was against the player in the most unfavorable position, the defense.