Quote:
Originally posted by Jurassic Referee
Unfortunately, folks like me really do understand this rule.Unless you can cite a rule that says anything different than what I posted above,may I suggest that folks like you are the ones that don't really understand this rule.
|
If that is the case, then the question would have never been asked in the first place. If all they have to do is look up what the rulebook says, why do we even cite the information? There would be no need for this board if all we had to do was cite information that is in the book. And if the average person understood everything in the rulebook word for word, then they would not come here to ask questions. To hold something you have to grab it first. They are practically the same thing in my eyes. If you want to nit pick that, the nit pick it.
Quote:
Originally posted by Jurassic Referee
Btw,I am arguing this from a rules standpoint only.There's nothing personal involved.I've made my point,and backed it up with a rules citation.Unless you can give me some type of rules citation to back your claim,it would just be a waste of time for me to argue this further by repeating the same rules citation over and over.
|
Good for you. Do you want some money now? I do not need nor do I feel it is necessary to use a rule citation to back up anything. Grabbing to me is one of the ways they have to gain possession. You cannot hold something unless you make some effort to grab at it first. If a player does not make an effort to grab the ball, you cannot have possession (unless you rule they have started a legal dribble of course). Just because it is not the word for word definition does not mean that people did not and could not understand the point. The "grab" point was to illustrate that touching the ball was not going to constitute status in the FC alone. Bascially the ball can be touched several times and not once has possession taken place to establish the ball in the front court. So the ball can carom (sorry not rulebook language again) off a player from the front court to the back court of a team and not have a back court violation in this original example. This was the basic point.
Now get back to dissect the point I just made. You will try to find something, I am sure you will.
Peace