Thread: Int
View Single Post
  #26 (permalink)  
Old Sun Mar 27, 2011, 02:39pm
JRutledge JRutledge is offline
Do not give a damn!!
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: On the border
Posts: 30,558
Quote:
Originally Posted by tref View Post
JRut, although the rulebooks at various levels are written different, many rules have the same meaning. I think the leagues rules are written best, terms like gather & clear path are clear cut & takes the judgment out of the equation.
That is great, but that is not something the NCAA has taken on as a standard. And the NCAA does a great job giving video on all these kinds of plays that we discuss here to show what is expected. Never heard anyone consider a "clear path" as a guideline.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tref View Post
Of course we can't apply NBA rules to an NCAA or HS contest, but doesn't clear path mean someone has an advantageous position at any level of play?
No. And the NCAA or the NF does not use that as criteria in their literature. If they did maybe we could agree, but you are using a personal standard to help you make a judgment. An intentional foul should be called if there are no one in front of the basket or 5 people in front of the basket if the actions are what cause the advantage. It should not judge on something that is not present in the rules or interpretation IMO for this type of foul.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tref View Post
The defender chasing down the AZ player raised my antennas... when they get beat, they cheat. But grabbing an airborne player at the rack was the selling point for me!
If that is the case any foul on the ball handler or shooter is an intentional foul and there is no such rule that supports that logic or interpretation.

Peace
__________________
Let us get into "Good Trouble."
-----------------------------------------------------------
Charles Michael “Mick” Chambers (1947-2010)
Reply With Quote