Bc violation...tell me I'm missing something

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Rich

On the first one, the C is straddling the division line. He's exactly where I'd want to be in the same situation.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

I was not saying that he was not where he should be, but this is still across the court from him and might be harder to determine if the foot was still in the FC when he first touched it and not in the BC.

Peace

[Rich]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I was not saying that he was not where he should be, but this is still across the court from him and might be harder to determine if the foot was still in the FC when he first touched it and not in the BC.

Peace

I would think it would be easier from there than right on top of it, actually.

But that one I can understand a no-call. Benefit of doubt is "no violation." But the other one is a misunderstanding of the rules, IMO.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Rich

I would think it would be easier from there than right on top of it, actually.

But that one I can understand a no-call. Benefit of doubt is "no violation." But the other one is a misunderstanding of the rules, IMO.

I would not call it if I am not sure or it is so close I cannot determine live. But I think being there he might see it clearer in this specific kind of play. That being said, the worse miss was the second one. That was obvious if you are just paying attention.

Peace

[Mregor]

Originally Posted by SNIPERBBB

Everyone that disagrees on the Facebook group makes the argument that the 3pts aren't across. First pass you could miss you get one live. The second pass is a almosrt straight from work the casebook.

3 points only applies to the dribble.

[SNIPERBBB]

Originally Posted by Mregor

3 points only applies to the dribble.

Try telling them that...SMH