Quote:
Originally Posted by Lah Me
Some calls are historically expected and accepted. This is one of those type of calls. The intent and purpose of the rule is to penalize the player that caused the violation. And B1 caused the violation by contacting A1's hand while it was on the ball. Without that contact, the ball does NOT go OOB. If you give team B the ball for a throw-in, you're giving team B an advantage that was not intended by rule. You cannot say that any contact is "incidental" if one team gains a decided advantage through that contact.
|
Let me see if I understand you. A1 is trying to control a rebound and has the ball cupped in one hand. From behind, B1 slaps the back of A1's hand that is in contact with the ball, causing A1's hand to push the ball in such a way that the ball goes out of bounds. Your probably not going to call a foul because you deem it to be incidental contact. Your also claiming that by advantage/disadvantage B1 caused the ball to go out of bounds, by contacting A1's hand, and you will award the ball to Team A for a throwin.
Interesting interpretation, which is probably why my two colleagues were discussing it. Two points to ponder. First, you're claiming that the contact put the A1 at a disadvantage not allowed by the rules. Isn't this the definition of a foul. Secondly, in twenty-seven years, I've never heard of this historical, and expected, interpretation, which, of course, doesn't necessarily mean that it doesn't exist. I've heard something similar. Two players are going for a rebound, the player in the back brushes the player in the front a little, not enough to call a foul, but, on the other hand, a little more than incidental contact. With a lot of hands, and fingers, near the ball, it goes out of bounds. Even though the last finger to touch it was the player in front, I've seen veteran officials award the ball to player in front's team. When asked about it, in some cases by a coach, the official stated that it was "better" than calling a foul on the behind player.
OK. I guess that my original question really had some value, so I guess, and hope, that this discussion will continue. "Talk amongst yourselves."