Quote:
Originally Posted by RadioBlue
Without evidence to support there was no control while the glove/hand was on the ground, you'd be incorrect and would be in direct opposition to NFHS Casebook Case 2.9.5 Situation C which states:
|
No, I wouldn't. You say glove/hand. NFHS Case Play says "hand." A glove is not a hand. Unless the player has hands like Shaq, you can see the ball, and see the grip and determine control. You can do none of those with a glove covering the ball.
And, you have the test backwards. I don't have to see evidence of lack of control. The player has to show evidence she has control.