Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.
Play 2.4: A1 dribbles toward B1. A1 then stops his dribble and jumps toward B1, but at an angle that will enable him to go past B1 if B1 either does not move or moves directly backward along A1’s original path before A1 went airborne. B1 moves to maintain his legal guarding position against A1. B1 is moving when A1, while airborne, makes contact with B1's torso. B1 is not moving toward A1 when the contact occurs. RULING 2.4: Charging foul by AI.
Therefore, in the final analysis, the only logical conclusion that can be made is that A1 has committed a charging foul in Play 2.4 because NFHS R4-S23-A3c (NCAA R4-S35-A6e) is the rule that governs in this play.
MTD, Sr.
|
Cutting out everything that's irrelevant leaves the above.
You e-mailed that exact play to Peter Webb, the IAABO head rules interpreter. His response to you, which was also copied to me stated:
"I have received a couple of notes....stating that a defender can obtain a legal guarding position AFTER an opponent has become airborne. OBVIOUSLY THE RULES DO NOT PERMIT THAT!"
Peter Webb told you that the correct call in play 2.4 is a BLOCK by B1, Mark.
Now you're trying to spin things further. You asked Peter Webb for a definitive ruling. You got a definitive ruling from him. You're now ignoring completely the definitive ruling that YOU asked for.
Why won't you now accept Mr. Webb's definitive ruling as sent to you?
Lah me.......
