|
That is my understanding. I can't, presently, view a dbl dribble call as having much to do with judgement - it is or is not. Is it possible to describe a play that may/may not be called a dbl dribblle violation, based on judgement?
I'm reminded of the old idea that an attempt at goal - shot - had to be defined by whether it hit the goal or not, in order for the shooter to be able to rebound the miss - that goes way back. With the current definitions of when a shot starts, and when it ends, now, a genuine attempt at goal, in the judgement of the official, allows the shooter to rebound a miss, whether or not it hits the goal. (A distinct situation, but the logic has some relevance.)
__________________
To be good at a sport, one must be smart enough to play the game -- and dumb enough to think that it's important . . . 
|