
Sat Dec 28, 2013, 12:38pm
|
Official Forum Member
|
|
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: In the offseason.
Posts: 12,263
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob1968
4.44.5 SITUATION D:
A1 secures possession of the ball with one knee in contact with the floor. May A1 assume a standing position without committing a traveling *violation?
RULING: It depends on what A1 does. If A1 attempts to stand up while holding the ball, a traveling violation occurs. However, if A1 starts a dribble and then rises, no violation has occurred. Also, A1 could pass, try for goal or call a time-out from that position.
This subject is an example of the FED setting a trap, and those who read only part of it, equating two different actions, in the verbiage they use:
Note that the SITUATION refers to a player with one knee on the floor, and uses the phrase "assume a standing position."
Then, in the RULING, they change the phrasiology from "assume a standing position" to "attempts to stand."
Not only is the first phrase - "assume a standing position" - commonly understood to mean "A position in which a person is erect, on both feet" - (Reference - Webster On-line Dictionary) - but the SITUATION stated dictates that from one knee, to "attempt to stand" inherently refers to standing on both feet.
Common understanding is that whether a person is on two knees or one, they are kneeling, not standing -(Reference - Webster On-line Dictionary). Thus, to go from a kneeling position on two knees, to a kneeling position on one knee, one is still kneeling, and not standing, and has not made an "attempt to stand."
|
All nice, but irrelevant. An attempt doesn't have to be successful to be considered an attempt so the fact they never make it to two feet doesn't matter.
|