The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Sat Dec 19, 2015, 09:17pm
Dad Dad is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 849
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyMac View Post
10.6.1E (NFHS 2004-05): B1 attempts to steal the ball from stationary A1 who is holding the ball. B1 misses the ball and falls to the floor. In dribbling away, A1 contacts' B1's leg, loses control of the ball and falls to the floor. RULING: No infraction or foul has occurred and play continues. Unless B1 made an effrot to trip or block A1, he/she is entitled to a position on the court even if it is momentarily lying on the floor after falling down.

IAABO (not NFHS) Interpretation (January 2015):A1 and B1 both jump in an attempt to rebound a missed try. A1 secures the rebound as B1 loses his/her balance and falls to floor behind A1. A1 spins to begin a dribble contacts B1 and falls. Is this a travel on A1 or foul on B1? Ruling: This is a blocking foul on B1. Although B1 fell to the floor, he/she did not obtain a legal guarding position, which requires an opponent to initially face a player with 2 feet on playing court and the front of the torso must be facing the opponent (Rule 4-23-2).
1st - ok
2nd - what? The implied block calls by this interpretation seem wrong. Am I missing something?
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Sun Dec 20, 2015, 01:21am
Esteemed Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 23,378
What's A Mother To Do ???

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dad View Post
1st - ok
2nd - what? The implied block calls by this interpretation seem wrong. Am I missing something?
The first, 10.6.1E, hasn't been in the NFHS casebook since 2004-05. Why did it disappear? Is it still relevant?

The second is an IAABO interpretation, which certainly doesn't carry the power of a NFHS interpretation, even among many IAABO members.

Does one believe a more than ten year old NFHS interpretation that is no longer in the NFHS casebook, or does one believe a contradictory non-NFHS interpretation from an organization that has a limited audience, is really not supposed to interpret rules, and even when it does, is supposed make interpretations based on NFHS rules.

I would prefer to believe the NFHS interpretation, but it hasn't been in the casebook for more than ten years. Why was it deleted? How is a new official supposed to know about this interpretation?
__________________
"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." (John 3:16)

“I was in prison and you came to visit me.” (Matthew 25:36)

Last edited by BillyMac; Sun Dec 20, 2015 at 01:44am.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Applaud the fallen? ODJ Football 13 Wed Nov 05, 2014 02:55pm
Fallen Umpire soundedlikeastrike Baseball 14 Sun Feb 24, 2008 02:06am
Pray for our fallen comrade Indy_Ref Basketball 1 Fri Feb 04, 2005 09:06am


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:16pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1