[Old School]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

You can't possibly be this dense, you have to be making this crap up. Even a fanboy should know better. As long as the defender is in LGP prior to the shooter becoming airborne, the contact will be square on. Whether he gave two steps or one step or just got there prior to the last leap, it's going to look the same at the point of contact.

You need to read your own writing because I got proof that you are in fact that dense. Go back and view the video and please tell us all, was the contact to the turso of the defensive player? We don't have to guess, it's right there in the video.

I see one big problem here with you guys that support this rule as written. You have never been in a situation where someone has taken your feet out from under you after you've gone airborne. In football, you got pads on, a helmet, you got a lot of equipment to help you absorb the fall. In basketball, you got a hard wood floor and no protection.

Judging whether event A happened before or after event B gets more difficult the closer they happen together in time. It gets even more difficult the further they happen from each other in distance. Let's just provide an absurd example: If you must determine whether B1 is in LGP prior to A1 crossing the half court line, I'm sure we could all agree this is impossible.

This is where stupid comes back in, or your lack of comprehension. I have stated no less then 10 times that the change I recommend will only occur at the basket. The NBA has this definition called the Lower Defensive Box. For this change to come into play, we must be in this area of the court, or for laymen's terms, at the basket. If we're not at the basket, normal LGP rules apply. You know, it's like A first, then B, then C and so forth.

If you insist they get one step, then the events are happening anywhere from 6 to 10 feet apart. Add another step, and the distance grows to at least 9 feet and upwards of 15 feet. Now, imagine trying to determine whether B1 is in LGP prior to A1 taking the two steps before going airborne when one event is happening two feet in front of the hoop and the other is happening behind the three point line. No official should even be looking in both places. The problem is you're not thinking through the ramifications of your drastic proposal. If you can't figure this out, then you'll just have to go on hating the rules the way they are.

I do not hate the rules. I love and support the rules, but this rule needs a little tweak. I like this paragraph better than anything you stated because it gets into fail checking or stress testing my logic. Any rule change must withstand criticism.
#1.) coaches don't teach their players to go run in front of a player out on the 3-pt line. What's being taught is to protect the basket, take the charge. This is really what's we're dealing with.
#2.) any player who starts his layup or goes airborne to shoot from the 3-pt line, I'm not concerned with.

I think my best argument here is the contact at the turso. Let's use the video for this next example. Instead of B3 stepping over at the last minute, imagine this player was already there, and A1 went airborne when he did. He's going to come down right into B3 lap or body, easy PC call to make. However, when the contact occurs elsewhere or other than the turso (submarine effect) is when you can reason that B3 got there to late. The defender is allowed to duck to prevent shock or emminent contact, but emmiment contact should occur at the turso if the defender had not move.