Quote:
Originally posted by Jurassic Referee
Quote:
|
Originally posted by Nevadaref
|
To prove my point consider the play in which A1 is behind the 3 pt. line and throws the ball into the lane where it hits B1 in the head and then goes into the basket without ever touching the floor. The correct ruling is that this counts for three points. If your interpretation of 4-4-4 were correct, this would only be two points since the ball would have "hit" the floor when it bounced off B1's head.
[/B]
|
There's the original quote of Nevadaref's above!
Casebook play 4.40.4SitB states "A1's three-point try is short and below ring level when it hits the shoulder of (a2);or(b1) and rebounds to the backboard and through the basket. Ruling: The three-point try ended when it was obviously short and below the ring. However,since a live ball went through the basket,two points are scored in both (a) and (b). (5-1)
It's two points if it hits B1's shoulder,but it's three points if it hits B1's head.
You guys are unbelievable.I don't think that I'm gonna argue this one further. [/B][/QUOTE]
JR:
I'll simplify my argument as much as I can. IMO we are not talking about a try here. Read my post above. If the FED was treating this as a try here why for God's ake do they use the word THROWN and not try in case 5.2.1C they seem to have no problem differentiating it elsewhere in the case and rules books. Should every thrown (read passed) ball be considered a try??? Lets see what kind of can of worms that could open up.
A thrown ball is not a try. Reading the case I have presented 3 times now straight from the case book, it is never implied that A1's throw is a try it is a THROWN ball not a try. For a released ball to be a try the players intent is to have it directly enter the basket. Consider case 5.2.1C to be a perimeter player trying to force a pass into the low block and it hits a defender in the head at the ft line. That is the case I am arguning here not that this is a try. That is exactly what Nevadaref is correctly IMO arguing as well. Again (for the fifth time) I do not like this ruling either however how many times have we argued that we have to enforce the rules as they are written???
[Edited by MN 3 Sport Ref on Jan 16th, 2003 at 02:55 PM]