View Single Post
  #50 (permalink)  
Old Fri May 04, 2012, 11:18pm
JRutledge JRutledge is offline
Do not give a damn!!
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: On the border
Posts: 30,528
Quote:
Originally Posted by bainsey View Post
You're better than this, Rut.
Not sure what you mean, when you suggested that a player going to the basket only landed improperly was because of a foul. Again, that play happens often as I stated, so I am not really sure you watch much basketball if that is your explanation for being fouled.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bainsey View Post
I appreciate your rule citation (4-27), but riddle me this: Had James not touched the ball at all and only made the same bodily contact, would you have had a foul?
Well touching the ball is a big part of this play. You cannot dismiss that part just to make the discussion convenient for your point of view. And if there was no ball contact and the play could not be completed, meaning he could not get the ball to the basket, and then a foul might have been a call on my part. But as I said, the ball being played is a big part of this play. It would be a big part of a play on a steal as well. Not much different in a steal where a ball is knocked away, you might expect some contact to take place in going for the ball. I did not say all contact was OK either, just stating that contact in this play did not change the movement of the shooter.

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