Quote:
Originally Posted by JRutledge
If the rules were clear there would be an interpretation to back it. Just taking one statement that is a fundamental and every other interpretation that clearly has the T being enforced second and even gives us some leeway to ignore an infraction until play has continued. Again, if the situation is clear than the NF would have made it clear. Just like you complain about the BC violations rules that you suggest (and I agree with you) are not without conflict, but we also know how the NF wants the rules to apply in that situation. Right now this causes confusion as a part of the penalty is not enforced if I do what some have suggested.
Peace
|
Every other interpretation that clearly has the T being enforced second involves the T actually happening 2nd. There's no exception. The rule is clear enough they don't need to come up with case play for it. It's rare enough there's no need to bother, but the rule isn't in any way ambiguous.
As Camron noted, there are plenty of times when the "possession" part of the penalty is not included. Off the top of my head:
1. End of quarter T.
2. False multiple or false double Technical fouls.
In fact, this is really just a false multiple foul. The rule is clear that it gets enforced in the order of occurrence. Trying to dance around that just doesn't work.
Now, it's exceedingly rare, and many of us will likely never have one. Folks like you who have established their careers likely wouldn't face any backlash for getting it wrong, and newer officials would likely get by with it too because few people would actually know they were wrong. That doesn't make the rule different, though.
And I'd rather get the rule right for that one time I get challenged (by a coach or assigner) who happens to know the rule. I guarantee my assigners would know the rule.