Quote:
Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee
It's kinda hard to figure something like that out, BITS, when you don't point it out and you also respond directly to 2 posts by Snaqs and me talking about something different.
And the biggest difference/problem in that discussion is that in the case play considering a player's wrongful TO request as disconcertion (9.1.3SIB COMMENT ), there was no TO granted. If you had granted the TO, you would also have to penalize that team for taking an excess TO. Instead, you don't grant the TO and call the disconcertion instead.
Two different case plays for two different situations iow....one with a timeout granted and one with no TO granted but disconcertion called instead of granting the TO.
|
Okay, I may have wandered on one post or the other about what we were talking about.
Bottom line: The bogus timeout can either be ignored, considered to be disconcertion and penalized accordingly, or granted, and penalized with the T if that team had no timeouts.
But only one of those 3 options, agreed?
__________________
I swear, Gus, you'd argue with a possum.
It'd be easier than arguing with you, Woodrow.
Lonesome Dove
Last edited by just another ref; Mon Jan 17, 2011 at 11:24pm.
|