Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Mark Padgett
JR - I think his point was the use of the word "and" in the rule. Using it implies you could have a foul in which an opponent is intentionally or flagrantly contacted when the ball is dead and have it be a personal foul. If that wasn't the case, there would be no need grammatically to use the phrase "and such contact is not a personal foul".
It wasn't a situation in which he didn't know the rule, it was that he thought the rulebook was self-confusing.
OK, I know "self-confusing" isn't a real word but maybe it will grow up to be one someday.  |
Mark, the poster said
"I thought that any dead ball foul could NOT be a personal foul, by definition..." Well, by the definition that I cited, he thought
wrong. That was my point. Contact on or by an airborne shooter after the ball is dead can be a personal foul.