Reaching out of your area

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Raymond

... on most shots, the hand is at the apex of the arm, making it above the wrist. If our young poster was referring to the hand, I'm pretty sure he would have said the hand ... no one ... is confused ...

Agree, on a shot the hand is above the wrist. Good point.

But, ilyazhito did say the hand.

Originally Posted by ilyazhito

... illegal use of hands, for hitting the shooter on the hand ...

I believe that ilyazhito may be confused, and may require a different interpretation than the one he has been using.

If the contact was on the arm, as he later stated, then my post is irrelevant.

He also mentioned the defender not striking the ball. One can legally strike the hand in contact with the ball and not ever contact the ball.

I'm sure that he'll be moseying along shortly to clarify his apparent confusion.

[LRZ]

For all the crap he sometimes gets here, let's cut ilyazhito some slack, as he did say "the defender struck the shooter on the arm" and "Red 3 hit the White player on his arm" and "It was illegal contact to a shooter's arm."

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by LRZ

For all the crap he sometimes gets here, let's cut ilyazhito some slack, as he did say "the defender struck the shooter on the arm" and "Red 3 hit the White player on his arm" and "It was illegal contact to a shooter's arm."

Some quotes are for different plays, same game.

My original criticism could have easily been handled by, "I meant to say arm, not hand". End of story. But it's not too late, it can still have a happy ending.

The purpose of my comment was to clarify for all that (in layman's terms) the hand is considered to be a part of the ball.

It is legal use of hands to accidentally hit the hand of the opponent when it is in contact with the ball. This includes holding, dribbling, passing, or even during a shot attempt. Striking a ball handler, or a shooter, on that player's hand (in contact with the ball) that is incidental to an attempt to play the ball is not a foul.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Some quotes are for different plays, same game.

My original criticism could have easily been handled by, "I meant to say arm, not hand". End of story. But it's not too late, it can still have a happy ending.

The purpose of my comment was to clarify for all that (in layman's terms) the hand is considered to be a part of the ball.

It is legal use of hands to accidentally hit the hand of the opponent when it is in contact with the ball. This includes holding, dribbling, passing, or even during a shot attempt. Striking a ball handler, or a shooter, on that player's hand (in contact with the ball) that is incidental to an attempt to play the ball is not a foul.

Maybe he has you on "ignore" because of your propensity for off-topic and misleading posts, so he doesn't know that YOU need clarification. You made the nonsensical reference to "below the wrist" as meaning "the hand".

If you think something needs to be clarified, either clarify it yourself without misrepresenting the original quote or ask an on-point question without all the circular nonsense that makes some of your posts impossible to digest.

And please quit using the excuse that "somebody" needs clarification. Allow the adults in this forum to speak for themselves, we don't need an advocate.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Raymond

And please quit using the excuse that "somebody" needs clarification. Allow the adults in this forum to speak for themselves ..

You (not you meaning you, Raymond) don't know what you don't know.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

You (not you meaning you, Raymond) don't know what you don't know.

I don't treat everyone here like their a 3rd grader who needs a teacher to guide them through the learning process. We may not all be scientists, but we are capable of learning and interpreting and questioning on our own.

YOU are the only one fixated on that one sentence. Anybody else here trying to learn about staying in or straying from their primary read his DETAILED description of the play, which consistently referenced contact to the arm.

Maybe he is not interested in YOU shoving YOUR teaching lesson down his throat. If YOU want to clarify for "those who don't know what they don't know", then write your clarification and move on. Instead we get the repetitive posts waiting for his answer (posts that are also disingenuous on your part since you type them in a manner pretending that you don't know the proper rule or verbiage).

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Raymond

... for "those who don't know what they don't know", then write your clarification and move on.

Maybe it was a typo hiccup? Certainly acceptable. Or maybe he doesn't know that contact on the hand during a shot can, in some cases, be legal? Unacceptable for a varsity official.

If it's the former, I will withdraw my criticism.

If it's the later, we can further discuss this topic.

I don't know which it is? He can easily answer this, and put it to bed for good.

Or he can just lay low and keep me wondering. That's also certainly acceptable.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Raymond

.. in a manner pretending that you don't know the proper rule or verbiage.

Good point, I apologize to ilyazhito for my sarcasm (if he's reading my posts).

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Agree, on a shot the hand is above the wrist. Good point.

But, ilyazhito did say the hand.



I believe that ilyazhito may be confused, and may require a different interpretation than the one he has been using.

So you simply ignored his 3 other comments that referenced the arm and the one statement that referenced below the wrist during the shooting motion?

And the fact that you made this reference, "Let's see, the part of the arm below the wrist? Let's call it the hand"? The purpose of that? Can't we ever just stay on point so that whatever can be learned from the conversation doesn't get lost in your boredom?

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Raymond

So you simply ignored his 3 other comments that referenced the arm and the one statement that referenced below the wrist during the shooting motion?

That would be fine if he just said that he meant to say arm instead of hand, but he never did, nor did he edit his original post.

I still don't believe that he fully understands 4-24-2. But he should be by shortly to clarify.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

That would be fine if he just said that he meant to say arm instead of hand, but he never did, nor did he edit his original post.

I still don't believe that he fully understands 4-24-2. But he should be by shortly to clarify.

I'll type slowly for youuuuuuuu.

He referenced the contact 5 different times. The first time, generically he typed "hand". The other 4 times he clearly indicated the contact was to the arm. So you cherry-picked one statement simply so you could post a Ginger Rogers video. That stuff gets annoying.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Raymond

So you cherry-picked one statement simply so you could post a Ginger Rogers video.

It's pretty tough to cherry pick when there was only one cherry to pick in the original post. My criticism was valid then, got a somewhat confusing, highly detailed reply, then I cherry picked to get back to the original post, and I will change my criticism as soon as he says, "I meant to say hand".

[ilyazhito]

I'm surprised that people seem to be arguing semantics, not necessarily the merits of the call that I made. It was on Trail's side of the lane, but still in an area where L, T, and C coverage could overlap. Lead had no call, but he was probably either screened or looking at lower bodies. I believe that I did the right thing by waiting for the T to make the call, followed by a cadence whistle and selling the call. What would y'all have done in this situation?

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by ilyazhito

I'm surprised that people seem to be arguing semantics, not necessarily the merits of the call that I made. It was on Trail's side of the lane, but still in an area where L, T, and C coverage could overlap. Lead had no call, but he was probably either screened or looking at lower bodies. I believe that I did the right thing by waiting for the T to make the call, followed by a cadence whistle and selling the call. What would y'all have done in this situation?

Don't care where you were, or how you sold the call.

End it now. Contact on hand? Or, contact on arm?

Say the right word and this will all go away.

Originally Posted by ilyazhito

... illegal use of hands, for hitting the shooter on the hand ...