Quote:
Originally Posted by bainsey
Your words...
|
Context:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snaqwells
No, there's no case play that says that. There's a rule. The case play that says the opposite applies to technical fouls, not intentional fouls.
All the case plays you need are there to determine how to administer the play when a personal foul occurs before a try has begun; and they all comply with the rule.
The "unfair advantage" is punished by two shots and the ball, per the rule. It's why you don't just go with a common foul. It's the same as if B1 had fouled A1 rather than A2. If he shoved A1 two steps before he could begin gathering the dribble, would you give him the shot anyway?
|
1. I said nothing about holding the whistle for a common foul.
2. The context is that this was a response to your post below.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bainsey
Good ol' supply and demand! It belongs right up there with death and taxes.
I'm not totally sold on that, yet.
For me, it comes back to advantage/disadvantage. Does the contact create an unfair advantage? Will blowing the whistle compromise a fairly earned advantage? Now, if there's case play that soundly states the play must be blown dead immediately, then my point is moot. That's all I'm stating. I'll defer to the senior statesmen of this board for such a ruling.
|
My point was the "unfair advantage" aspect is taken care of by the added penalty of the possession. Note there's nothing about holding or whitholding your whistle on either foul.
You hold your whistle only long enough to determine if it was really a foul; which will typically take longer for a common foul than for an intentional foul.