Hanging on the Rim

[deecee]

Originally Posted by wildcatter

It doesn't matter that he pulled his body up, to whatever extent, as long as he was trying to prevent injury to himself. He may have pulled up more than he anticipated, but he's not an NBA player so I'll give him the benefit of the doubt.

I don't see anywhere in the rules where going parallel to the ground is an automatic T. He let go as soon as he got his balance and was able to land on his feet.

We're going to agree to disagree on this one.

What Rich said. The rule allows for a player to hang on the rim to prevent injury. He simply didn't do that. That's as easy a T as I can see. He might as well have slapped the backboard on the way down.

I have no problem disagreeing with a position that is 100% incorrect. I have seen at least 2 similar videos where my HS and college assignors and interpreters have said it's a T. I'll go by their directive and my judgement.

[wildcatter]

Originally Posted by deecee

What Rich said. The rule allows for a player to hang on the rim to prevent injury. He simply didn't do that. That's as easy a T as I can see. He might as well have slapped the backboard on the way down.

I have no problem disagreeing with a position that is 100% incorrect. I have seen at least 2 similar videos where my HS and college assignors and interpreters have said it's a T. I'll go by their directive and my judgement.

Great. Super helpful. Good to know this position if 100% incorrect, without citing any specific rules, case plays, or similar videos. If the intention of your reply was to antagonize, it was successful.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by wildcatter

Great. Super helpful. Good to know this position if 100% incorrect, without citing any specific rules, case plays, or similar videos. If the intention of your reply was to antagonize, it was successful.

The only easy T's I've seen in this thread were the #1 & #3 videos in the same post with the Anthony Davis dunk. AremRed's play was not a T to me, so any claim that it is an "easy" T is purely subjective.

[so cal lurker]

It seems to me that the exception has largely swallowed the rule. IIRC, in the dark ages, you couldn't hang, period. So you chose whether or not to dunk knowing you couldn't hold the rim as you did it. It seems (and I could be wrong) that greater tolerance and the idea of protecting oneself came with the "snap back" rims designed to protect backboards. (As I recall, the first generation of safety rims just pulled away and had to be manually reset, and the next generation had the snap-back feature.) When the safety rule first came in, it seems to have been pretty limited in what was permitted, but over time more and more was permitted (less clear danger needed to justify and more gymnastics permitted as part of it). From a non-ref perspective, it seems to me the attitude began as "it better be obvious you're protecting yourself and needed to do what you did" or its a T, and has evolved into "hey, it's a safety rule, so unless I'm sure you're showboating or taunting, I'm not gonna question what you need to do to protect yourself if anyone's around."

But maybe that's just a misperception on my part -- I'd be curious what those who have been doing this for eons think.

[packersowner]

For whats it worth the opposing team coaches thought it should have been called.

To me when the legs start swinging parallel to the body in this situation, a T is warranted and defensible.

[crosscountry55]

Originally Posted by so cal lurker

It seems to me that the exception has largely swallowed the rule. IIRC, in the dark ages, you couldn't hang, period. So you chose whether or not to dunk knowing you couldn't hold the rim as you did it. It seems (and I could be wrong) that greater tolerance and the idea of protecting oneself came with the "snap back" rims designed to protect backboards. (As I recall, the first generation of safety rims just pulled away and had to be manually reset, and the next generation had the snap-back feature.) When the safety rule first came in, it seems to have been pretty limited in what was permitted, but over time more and more was permitted (less clear danger needed to justify and more gymnastics permitted as part of it). From a non-ref perspective, it seems to me the attitude began as "it better be obvious you're protecting yourself and needed to do what you did" or its a T, and has evolved into "hey, it's a safety rule, so unless I'm sure you're showboating or taunting, I'm not gonna question what you need to do to protect yourself if anyone's around."

But maybe that's just a misperception on my part -- I'd be curious what those who have been doing this for eons think.

I think your assessment of the evolution of the rule and its enforcement is spot on.

We wouldn't have points of emphasis if rule enforcement didn't tend to evolve. Remember when slapping the backboard was a POI in…2007/2008ish? Lots of Ts called the first couple of years. Players stopped doing it. Now I've noticed they're starting to do it again, and few calls are being made. We all seem quick to say, "I think he might have been trying to block the shot so I'll give him the benefit of the doubt."

Rule evolution is……interesting?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk