Quote:
Originally Posted by Nevadaref
Sorry, but you are mistaken. The original intent of the rule, which was to make it easier for the defense to steal the ball, is perfectly in line with the three situations that you have listed.
In all three situations, the offense gets punished, but the defense does not.
The rule was put in to increase the likelihood of a turnover and that is exactly what happens in all three of the cases that you have cited.
|
Well, if we truly wanted to reward the defense and create turnovers, why not say if the defense can cause the ball to go into the back court it is a violation? If the defense completely deflects a pass into the back court (requiring better defensive position in the passing lane), the offense is NOT punished since they are allowed to retrieve the ball without penalty. If, however, the defense is barely able to get a finger on the pass (not requiring as good of a defensive position) near the division line, but not enough to push the ball into the back court, the offensive player is punished if he touches the ball in the front court (ever so slightly) while moving into the back court. These two situations are in conflict, in my opinion, with your thought that the intent is to create more turnovers.
Secondly, I disagree that the intent was solely to create more turnovers. I wasn't around in 1933 during the discussion on stalling, but I think that they were attempting to create more offense in the game. In the case of teams quickly bringing the ball up the court, then making a pass near the division line that results in a player never actually getting the ball over the division line (jumping from the front court, but receiving the ball four feet in the back court) does not seem to mean that original intent. I still do not believe that the intent of the rule was to penalize a team that is fully attempting to advance the ball up the court -- in some cases very quickly -- in the case of the catch in the air while coming from the front court and landing in the back court. Once again, if you are looking to create turnovers, why not say if you catch the ball on a jump stop with one foot on each side of the line, it is a turnover (i.e. catch the ball with any part of your body in the front court and the ball is in the front court, if you are also standing with part of your body in the back court it is a violation -- similar to the case of the pivot into the back court at the division line).
In the case of throw-ins from underneath the attacking team's basket, the throw-in can be made into the back court. Once again, if you want to be create turnovers, why not make this a violation (I believe this is a violation in at least one other league in the US)?