Quote:
Originally Posted by bainsey
Good point, as is Snaq's.
I suppose a better way for me to say it is, if contact causes a travel, and it's contact that I'd otherwise rule as incidental, I can't anymore, because the contact has caused a violation. Someone on the floor causing someone to travel is a foul, in my mind.
I guess I'm just a bigger believer in the college application. In the meantime, though, that hardly matters.
|
Contact determined to be incidental isn't necessarily so because it didn't cause the opponent a disadvantage. Sometimes, contact is simply legal. In this case (NFHS), this contact is defined to be legal because the player had a legal position on the court and was not moving at the time of contact.
Note that a legal position on the court is NOT the same as legal guarding position. There are many instances of a player having a legal potion while not having legal guarding position. The only things LGP add is the ability to be moving/jumping/verticality at the time of contact.
Think of contact with a hand which is in contact with the ball.....it is also incidental by rule, not because it didn't affect the play.