Two comments, one on what bob said and one on what Walter said. First of all, let me say they both gave great answers.
Bob's comment that if the force of the swat hits the board so hard that it cannot be ignored, then it's a T is absolutely correct according to NF rules. However, I never call it if I think the shot block attempt was legitimate. How can I reconcile this with the rule? Here's my rationalization: I get to decide if the amount of disruption to the backboard is or is not enough to ignore. It's a judgement call on my part. I am very good at ignoring things (just ask my wife). I feel that if B1 absolutely tried to block the shot but just missed, he should not be penalized for being strong.
Walter analyzed the goaltending, BI and technical rules much in the same manner that I approach the over and back call. That is, there are certain elements to the call and if all of the elements are present, you make the call. If even one element is missing, you have no call. I would like him to point out, however, an example of the goaltending call during a free throw that he addressed, now that players cannot go into the lane until the ball hits something. How can you now have this call? Can you have a goaltending call if the ball has hit the backboard, a player goes into the lane then and somehow touches the ball as it is on it's downward flight into the basket from the board? And if that was even possible (and I don't think anyone is that fast), wouldn't it be BI and not goaltending? Is BI during a free throw also a technical?
I'm sure Walter will give us his usual expert analysis. This is not a tongue-in-cheek put down, but real praise for his insight.
|