View Single Post
  #12 (permalink)  
Old Sun Jan 30, 2011, 02:20pm
jearef jearef is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scrapper1 View Post
Rule 2-3 is there for situations that are not covered by the rules. So you're going to call a violation that you acknowledge is not a violation by rule?????
If we accept that logic, then Rule 2-3 would never be used. I believe 2-3 is an acknowledgment by the rules gurus that there are things they may not have anticipated in drafting and amending the rules, which things permit a player to gain an advantage that he shouldn't be getting.

I acknowledge that the situation presented does not appear to be specifically covered by any rule. It simply seems to me, as originally suggested by Billy, that in this situation the player is gaining an advantage that is not intended by the rules. I agree with Jurassic when he says that once we rule this a fumble, no further inquiry is necessary. If this is a fumble, I have nothing. However, a fumble is the "accidental" loss of player control. In reading the original post, I was of the opinion that Billy had determined that the player was "in control".
Reply With Quote