Quote:
Originally posted by hawkk
Your are absolutely right that there is no "contradiction," but I believe that there is a philisophical inconsistency between the two rules -- why (and I mean "philisophically why?", not "why by rule?")do we penalize a non-dribbler for lifting the pivot foot and putting it back down in exactly the same place? Philisophically, I think that is inconsistant with the concept of the three point rule for the dribbler, for whom an exception has been carved out. I'd like to see the same philosophy adopted for the pivoting player -- a two point rule, if you will. (But I don't think it will happen because it doesn't arise enough -- we'd probably need a big televised game with a turnover in the last two minutes to draw attention to the issue and make anyone care enough to change it.)
|
Without the dribbler / three-points rule, some dribbles into the front-court that otherwise "looked normal" could technically be violations. Rather than make us decide, or allow coaches to yell about it, or interrupt the game, or confuse the fans, or ... the rules committee just added the exception / explanation.
Philosopically, "it makes the game better."