Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Smitty
No. The difference is intentionally putting yourself in an illegal position that disrupts an opponent's ability to get where they want to go. Someone laying on the floor after having fallen did not put themselves in that position intentionally. But if you get down on your hands and knees behind an offensive player, for the purpose of having them trip over you (what other purpose could it be - looking for a contact lens?), then that's a foul.
|
Where in the rules does it describe the difference between "intentionally" being in that position, vs. "unintentional"? Are you saying if a player "unintentionally" puts themselves in that position, they aren't responsible for the foul? Where in the rules does it say that? Where in the rules does it say being on your hands and knees is an "illegal position"? What about the statement in 4-23-1 that says, "Every player is entitled to a spot on the court provided such player gets there first without illegally contacting an opponent." B1 certainly meets that criteria. B1 is perfectly still, and A1 initiates the contact by backing into B1. If A1 trips over B1's outstretched legs or arms, I can use that as a basis for a foul. But if A1 simply trips over B1's torso, what rule basis do I have for calling a foul on B1? Why wouldn't I call a travel on A1 (assuming A1 held onto the ball while falling)?
Look, I know it don't feel right. But unless someone can come up with a good rule reference, I can't see justification for calling a foul on B1. Again, kudos to the coach for coming up with this scenario.