Quote:
Originally Posted by billyu2
Originally Posted by M&M Guy
Correct. And in the OP, the ball is both live and put into play. So none of the provisions in 10-1-5 apply, because, as you said, every single item has to do with actions or lack of actions that keep the ball from becoming live or being put into play.
Yes, and isn't the opposite also true and supported by rule? Actions by the defense intentionally or deliberately done to stop the clock ( or causing a live ball to become dead in this case) should be penalized with the violation OR a technical foul for unsporting behavior. See 9.3.3D Comment. In the OP would it be a stretch to regard the offense as having a clearly advantageous situation? They're up a point, .5 remaining. All they have to do is clank one off the rim, the ball is touched, end of game. Team B has virtually no chance here. Yet we're saying it's perfectly legal for Team B to deliberately and repeatedly commit a violation to cause a live ball to become dead denying Team A, who clearly has an obvious advantage, to complete the game.
|
billyu2 - see my above response to Camron. It's already been determined that "...actions by the defense intentionally or deliberately done to stop the clock..." is not always considered unsporting; in fact, it is still an acceptable strategy, even though some of us find it distasteful. The reason is we already have a penalty for the violation or foul, and simply continuing to do it isn't necessarily considered unsporting, outside of the specific delay situations.
Again, anyone ever had this happen? It wouldn't even be an issue if A had the possession arrow - if B continues to violate, all A1 has to do is step over the line (violate), and we an alternating-possession throw-in under the basket to team A. Now we have the ability to use a specific delay warning, and then the T.