The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Sun Feb 28, 2016, 06:01pm
Stubborn Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Columbus, OH
Posts: 1,517
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigCat View Post
I don't recall hearing anything about it. The rule is clear that you can't use electronic communication device TO COMMUNICATE WITH Players or to review a decision of the officials. And the case play is nearly identical. They would have to change both. As long as your not putting an earpiece on a player or using it to say "ref video shows you made wrong call"..then I'm not aware of anything that prevents it.
IMO, the wording in 10-1-3 is not very clear. While I'm sure what you said is their intent, it could have been worded a hell of a lot more clear. I believe it can be read like they are saying using electronic communication devices... for any purpose... is illegal, and goes on to give communicating with players on the court, and reviewing officials decisions, as particular examples only.
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Sun Feb 28, 2016, 06:06pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by BryanV21 View Post
IMO, the wording in 10-1-3 is not very clear. While I'm sure what you said is their intent, it could have been worded a hell of a lot more clear. I believe it can be read like they are saying using electronic communication devices... for any purpose... is illegal, and goes on to give communicating with players on the court, and reviewing officials decisions, as particular examples only.
Yeah, it's kind worded loosely and can be interpreted a couple of different ways. I think that's why they said the wording would be changed in April

Last edited by Jewls885; Sun Feb 28, 2016 at 06:08pm. Reason: Add
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Sun Feb 28, 2016, 06:07pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Illinois
Posts: 1,804
Quote:
Originally Posted by BryanV21 View Post
IMO, the wording in 10-1-3 is not very clear. While I'm sure what you said is their intent, it could have been worded a hell of a lot more clear. I believe it can be read like they are saying using electronic communication devices... for any purpose... is illegal, and goes on to give communicating with players on the court, and reviewing officials decisions, as particular examples only.
It's pretty clear. You can't use electronic devices to communicate w players on court or to review officials' decisions. That's the plain meaning of the words used. It doesn't say "for any purpose."
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Sun Feb 28, 2016, 06:14pm
Stubborn Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Columbus, OH
Posts: 1,517
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigCat View Post
It's pretty clear. You can't use electronic devices to communicate w players on court or to review officials' decisions. That's the plain meaning of the words used. It doesn't say "for any purpose."
Quote:
Use a megaphone or any electronic communication device, or electronic equipment for voice communication with players on the court, or use electronic audio and/or video devices to review a decision of the contest officials


I'm not an expert on the English language, written or spoken, but when I see a comma used I believe it's to separate parts of the sentence. For example, "he hit the ball, dropped the bat, and ran to first base." Those are three different actions being taken, meaning the "dropped the bat" part is not an extension of the "he hit the ball" part.

That is why I believe either the interpretation is wrong, or the wording needs to be fixed.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Sun Feb 28, 2016, 06:24pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Illinois
Posts: 1,804
Quote:
Originally Posted by BryanV21 View Post

I'm not an expert on the English language, written or spoken, but when I see a comma used I believe it's to separate parts of the sentence. For example, "he hit the ball, dropped the bat, and ran to first base." Those are three different actions being taken, meaning the "dropped the bat" part is not an extension of the "he hit the ball" part.

That is why I believe either the interpretation is wrong, or the wording needs to be fixed.
It could be worded better...and, after looking at it closer, I can see that it looks like cell phone use is prohibited. The case play says "relay" info. I don't see that as being a runner from the stands to the bench. It could be clarified.

Last edited by BigCat; Sun Feb 28, 2016 at 07:17pm.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

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
Illegal Participation or Illegal Formation or Illegal Substitution. mrerrl Football 9 Sat Sep 19, 2015 12:53am
WR - false start vs. illegal motion vs. illegal shift stegenref Football 25 Sat Oct 02, 2010 09:21pm
illegal Substitution or illegal Participation verticalStripes Football 11 Fri Sep 12, 2008 10:57am
Illegal Formation or Illegal participation? wgw Football 9 Mon Aug 29, 2005 09:31am
illegal ball... illegal pitch? [email protected] Baseball 5 Thu Apr 17, 2003 06:57pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:56pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1