Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Back In The Saddle
The "circular reasoning" part of your question is intriguing. In addition to allowing the result of the foul inform your decision, there is the matter of the more exacting criteria for intentional and flagrant fouls. Strictly by rule, a foul you wouldn't judge intentional during a live ball, shouldn't be judged intentional during a dead ball. The rule is the same.
But that leaves us with a potential conundrum which is that common foul contact which occurs entirely within a dead ball period, if it impacts the subsequent live ball play, technically must be passed on.
|
Yes, that is exactly what I was trying to communicate! I love it when someone else grasps the rules discussion on an intellectual and philosophical level. Your last sentence lists what I believe to be a clear flaw in the rules.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Back In The Saddle
Having said that, in your poke in the back scenario, if it's a non-jumper poking a jumper, it's a clear violation for breaking the plane of the circle. I don't have my book handy so I won't assert this with certainty, but I believe both jumpers are required to be in their own half of the circle. So a poke in the back by the other jumper would also be a violation.
|
The rules only prohibit a nonjumper from breaking the plane of the circle with a FOOT. The rule says nothing about other body parts. There is no protection other than a foul, but we have just discussed how calling one in this case is paradoxical.
BTW the rule for players in marked lane-spaces is the written the same way.