Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Old School
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.
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.
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.
|
RED- If the speed limit analogy is not applicable to the situation or at least comprable, then neither is the football analogy, but I, in fact think they are both applicable in their respective regards.
ORANGE- Everybody has let you keep on and keep on giving your opinion, which you have the God given right to do, without totally, blatantly, brutally humiliating you like they do in previous threads and yet in 2 successive posts you refer to a person or persons as stupid and lacking comprehension. Are you wanting everybody on here to disagree with you and hate you? I am in
PR and let me tell you that this is not how you persuade an audience.
GREEN- If you call every bit of contact to the torso an offensive foul, then you will have at least a good amount of plays that will be incorrect. I always hate hearing the "torso" explanation on block/charge play. It is good in a broad, general way, but there is so much more to it than that, imo.
Also, your mention of the Lower Defensive Box (NBA) has no merit within your debate. The LDB was created for several reasons, one of which causes for less distance to be b/w players on block/charge plays. If a play originates in the LDB a player can take a charge inside the RA.
If you feel so adamant about players coming in underneath, then just deem the play a flagrant foul and toss the kid. I'm sure you will get high praise by everyone for that one! Sorry I had to make a joke somewhere.
I have been undercut several times in my basketball career, and yes it sucks, but it happens and I, personally, don't think that you are going to stop it from happening especially in HS where there are less and less athletic players on teams and the way they can contribute to the team is by giving up their own bodies(taking a charge) for the sake of it.
I personally believe we give 2 steps to players already on block/charge plays. We give them 1 when they gather the ball (pivot) and 2 when they step off the pivot foot onto the other (the one they jump off of). The gather starts the continuing motion meaning the defender has to be there when the offensive player gathers, easily giving the offensive player the ability to switch and/or change direction. How is that not good enough?