Quote:
Originally Posted by Ch1town
You mean B2? And even after A2 gained possession & TC control?
Should A2 just patiently wait until B2 decides to straighten up & jump for the ball??
|
No, but A2 should be aware that by going over B2 and invading B2's space that he (A2) could be called for a foul if B2 choses to exercise his right to verticality.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ch1town
The "same rebound" is where your sitch differs from the original. There wasn't any rebound for A2 to get as B2 already had it before contact occured, sounds like a play on to me.
|
None of that really matters. Was B2 in A2's vertical space or not? Even if A2 has the ball it doesn't remove B2's right to the verticality.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ch1town
Say in the OP that B2 had the same actions over A2 but he punched it home while he was in the air... we aren't really wiping that off are we?
|
Probably not, but that is not at all the same as long as the contact was with A2 upstretched arms. We're talking about whether A2 has committed a foul or not. I'd agree that B2, having his arms over A2 with possesion of the ball will not be a foul on B2 if A2 jumps up into those arms. However, if B2 came through A2's body, that is a different case.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ch1town
I don't the intent of the verticality is to reward players who don't even jump for a rebound. You gotta at least leave the ground, IMHO.
|
But the whole point of the discussion was that the player was going up for the ball....reaching up and/or jumping while B2 had thier arms in the same space.
Analogy...
A3 jumps. Then, B4 takes a spot on the floor, got there "first", is stationary. A3, still airborne, crashes into B4. What do we have? A foul on B4. Why? becasue A3 is entitled to to pass through the spot B4 was in due to prior actions.