Quote:
Originally Posted by rwest
Until I see a case play or rules interpretation I will have to disagree with the majority on this based on my interpretation of the rule book. The rule book, just as any written document, is open to interpretation. Here's some points to consider.
1. The rule book does not define how large a spot a player is entitled to. To say that lying on the floor is legal because you are entitled to a spot on the floor is interpreting the rule book to allow for this. I'm not saying it's wrong just that that is one interpretation. The rule book doesn't say this is legal but it also doesn't say it is illegal.
2. There are rules that imply that there is a limit to the size of the spot on the floor a player is entitled to. For instance, in setting a screen you are not allowed to set your screen wider than your shoulder. Even if you are stationary, you can be called for a foul because you set up to wide. Also, you can't extend your arms, hips or shoulders into the path of a player. If contact occurs you can be called for a foul, even if you are stationary.
3. Stationary players can be called for a foul, as shown above. Why? Because they are not entitled to as large as a spot on the floor as they would like.
|
You have established a interesting premise.
The player with the ball willingly stepped over a horizontal player thus losing his balance and falling to the floor with the ball. Unless, this play happened in a restricted area on the court (corners' close to sidelines; or endlines some place). Then, I would go with the travel too.
B could have taking a different path besides stepping directly over A.