View Single Post
  #44 (permalink)  
Old Tue Nov 11, 2008, 03:37pm
OHBBREF OHBBREF is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Ohio, cincinnati
Posts: 813
Quote:
Originally Posted by just another ref View Post
It is obviously true that if the shot is good, disconcertion is irrelevant. BUT, by this logic, B1 does whatever on the first shot, which is good, which you say means no disconcertion. So now, on the second shot, B1 does exactly the same thing, but the shot misses, you would say that it is disconcertion? I say that if the violator is judged to have bad intentions, it makes this violation easier to call. But mainly I say the decision to make the call should already have been made before the result of the shot is known.
Yes that decision could be made, by the delayed violation signal, however because the ball went in does not mean the shooter was not the victim of diconcerstion, as you so accurately noted from you game in Beruit with bombs going off. But if the shot goes in you can not punnish the violation all you can do is tell little Johnny not to try to blow up the gym again while the other team is shooting free throws. Or you will call in an air strike to stop them.
__________________
New and improved: if it's new it's not improved; if it's improved it's not new.
Reply With Quote