View Single Post
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Mon Aug 24, 2009, 01:03pm
Scrapper1 Scrapper1 is offline
Lighten up, Francis.
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,686
Quote:
Originally Posted by FMadera View Post
If the hand or foot go beyond the center line (but are still in contact), there is no foul even if there is a player right next to the penetrating body part. However, there would be a violation if there were intereference (if a player were tripped, for example).
But the opponent does not actually have to get tripped for interference to occur. The rules state that it can be the "apprehension" of contact. IOW, if the opponent has to move around the foot to play the ball because she's worried about tripping, that is interference.

Quote:
No one is disregarding any safety concerns. Not sure how you got that.
Part of your reply in the other thread said:

Quote:
15.2.4.1: If the foot or hand go beyond the center line, if part of the hand or foot are above or on the center line, there is no violation if there is no interference. Whether or not there is a safety hazard makes no difference at all, so long as the hand or foot is on or above the line (again, so long as there is no interference).
Emphasis mine, obviously.

IMHO, 15.2.4.1 should simply be eliminated. That way, the rule would essentially be same for all situations: "It's ok for any body part to cross the line, as long as part of your body stays on or over the line. It's an immediate fault if interference or a safety concern occurs." There's no reason to differentiate the two scenarios.
Reply With Quote