Thu Jun 07, 2007, 05:01pm
|
|
Official Forum Member
|
|
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: In the offseason.
Posts: 12,263
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by M&M Guy
Quote:
Originally Posted by blindzebra
1. The rules need to be cleaned up, we have countless examples of poorly written rules. Agreed.
2. Yes, it isn't specifically laid out. Agreed.
3. But it is clear that there isn't supposed to be a judgment between a try and a throw, Agreed so logically, a throw should end the same way a try does. This is where I agree in principle, but there is nothing in the rules that support that. This is where you are making an assumption (albeit a logical one) and reading into the rules something that isn't specified.
This was provided in the COMMENT that was published with the rule change. Its not in the rule book but the purpose of the rule has been published by the NFHS.
4. Logic also says that the defensive touch is talking about a defender attempting to block the try/throw immediately not touching it 15 feet away. Again, you are making an assumption that is not specified in the rules. It does specify the defender is inside the arc; that's it.
Previous examples (perhaps the funny book) diagram this.
5. Common sense tells you that the rules intent isn't to count 3 on a pass from outside the arc, away from the basket that strikes a defender and goes in the basket. So, does that mean you would not count the alley-oop pass that goes off the defender and into the basket as a 3, but only a 2?
If it had a chance of going in, I'm calling it a try and calling GT. If it has fallen short or passes below the rim, it's a 2.
6. Taking common sense, logical progression and the fact we have a case play in place that says we can count it as a 2, The case play you are referring to specifically say "try". We all agree the OP was not a try. why would anyone hold onto 5-2-1 and rule a 3? Because it was not a try.
|
Again, my point is you are reading into the wording of the rule and case play; I am taking it as written.
Why is it no one wants to answer my question: if a try and a throw are considered the same thing, if A1 is fouled behind the arc in the act of throwing the ball, should A1 be awarded 3 FT's?
|
You're ignoring entirely the comment on the purpose of the rule as published by the NFHS. Sure, it's not in the rule book, but it is valid.
|