Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.
The people who feel that a "legal" pivot allows the pivoter to make illegal contact with an opponent and not be charged with a foul. A "legal" pivot means that the pivoter pivoted without violating the rules of traveling and nothing more. The word "legal" has no bearing as to whether or not a foul has been committed.
|
Oh? Then whyinhell does the very definition of a foul states that it involves
ILLEGAL contact? Riddle me that, Batman!
If a player commits a foul with an over- extended elbow or pivots with his elbow moving faster than the fulcrum of his pivot, then that player has just committed an illegal pivot. He doesn't have to travel during that illegal pivot either to commit a violation. He may have committed a violation if the elbow was swung faster than the rest of the body while pivoting but no contact was made. That's an illegal pivot that hasn't got a damn thing to do with traveling. And if he makes contact during that
illegal pivot, he's just committed a foul.
Your statement above makes zero sense, rules-wise, imo.
If you really think that any player on the court can commit a foul while performing a
LEGAL act under the written rules, I'd sureasheck like to know where you came up with something like that. I sureasheck can't think of anything anywhere in the rules that espouses any philosophy like that.