View Single Post
  #52 (permalink)  
Old Fri Aug 01, 2003, 03:36pm
Back In The Saddle Back In The Saddle is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: In a little pink house
Posts: 5,289
Quote:
Originally posted by Jurassic Referee
The rules for BI and GT,I believe,were put in to stop players from preventing a goal that was possibly about to be legally scored,or to stop players from aiding the ball to go through their basket(i.e. scoring a goal) when it might not do so without their help.The definition of a goal is a live ball that enters the basket from ABOVE,and then goes through.Coming from below,you can never meet that definition--because if it does clear the ring from below,it's an immediate violation.Just seems like common sense to me.You don't want to award something that the offended team could never have attained anyway.
And that is what has bugged me about what I think I'm hearing in this discussion. Awarding points because of BI for a ball that entered the basket from the bottom seems to violate what I understand to be the spirit of the rule.

It may be defensible by consulting the strict letter of the law, but I think it would be a violation of the spirit of the rule to call it. It certainly would violate the "law of least astonishment."

All of which I argue from the point of view of the spirit of the rule and feel for the game, not the letter of the law, which would appear to support awarding the points.
__________________
"It is not enough to do your best; you must know what to do, and then do your best." - W. Edwards Deming
Reply With Quote