|
When trying to wrap our minds around this, we might try looking at it from the standpoint of the rules makers.
Reaching over the line gets a DoG warning and then a T in order to provide a disincentive. The warning isn't much of a disincentive. What other option would we have besides a T for the second (and later) offenses?
Contacting the thrower is a personal foul: it's illegal contact during a live ball. We want a stiffer disincentive for this kind of contact, so by rule we make it an intentional foul. The only other option here would be flagrant, which seems too much.
Contacting the ball while it's in the thrower's hands is not a personal foul, but we want a disincentive for that too. So it needs to be a T, also.
It's true that in order to call the IF for contacting a thrower the defender must also have violated the line/plane restriction. But since these are all parts of one act (fouling the thrower) I agree with Bob (which one ought always to do, btw) and would penalize the "result" or the act itself and not its constituents.
__________________
Cheers,
mb
|