|
you know, looking at the rule book again, and trying to remember back to the dark ages when I studied formal logic, I'm wondering about carefully examining the words used.
The book says that a dribble is ball movement that yadda, yadda, yadda...
It does not say that all ball movement that yadda yadda yadda is a dribble.
Is that significant?
I mean, suppose you said, "A cat is a mammal that has four legs, pointed ears, and eyes that glow in the dark." Could you then say "Look, it's a mammal, has four legs, pointed ears and eyes that glow in the dark so it must be a cat?" Well, no! It might be a lemur, certain types of dogs, and so forth and so on.
Just because a dribble is a certain type of movement doesn't mean that all of those types of movement are dribbles, does it?
|