Quote:
Originally Posted by Scrapper1
You just made my entire point, Camron. Thanks!!  |
No, I did exactly the opposite. I can not imagine why you find it so difficult understand the basic purpose of the rule.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scrapper1
But as you just pointed out above, we no longer judge whether it might be a try. That was "the whole point of the rule change", as you stated. That's precisely why they included the words "any thrown ball" in the rule -- so you don't judge whether it might be a try. If the ball is thrown from the floor beyond the arc and goes in the basket, it's three points. Period.
We all know what they INTENDED the rule to be. But that's not what the rule IS. They wrote it badly. It needs to be re-written to correspond with the case plays.
|
It IS what was intended, even if the words are poorly written. We're not "lawyers" making a case on the definition of the work "is". We're to undertand what the purpose of the rules are and apply them inteligently....not blindly and by the letter of what is written.
Tell me one thing....when does the thrown ball cease to be thrown...and give me a citation in the rule book that defines it. Since it is not there, all we have is 4.41C to explain the intent of the committee....that when the ball can no longer possibly go in without redirection, it can no longer be a 3.