Quote:
Either way I doubt you're asking anything that's not already answered by applying the principles of the respective rules and case plays. Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk |
Before ...
Quote:
I'm telling you that if a player control foul occurs before the defense touches the ball on the ring or in the cylinder, I'm not awarding the basket. |
Quote:
Are you purposely trying to confuse new officials? Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk |
Matthew 7:7 ...
Quote:
|
So like I said a few posts above, I doubt you're asking anything that's not already answered by applying the principles of the respective rules and case plays.
Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk |
Apples To Apples ...
Quote:
Quote:
https://tse2.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP.A...=0&w=336&h=140 |
One Post Back ...
Quote:
|
Quote:
If I'm a teaching a new official that the ball is immediately dead when a player control foul is committed, I don't want you coming behind me and saying "what if it's a basket interference","what if it's a goaltending?". That confuses new officials trying to learn. Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk |
Quote:
|
Always Listen To bob ...
Quote:
|
Direct Question ...
Quote:
Quote:
|
Next Level ...
Quote:
The purpose of the casebook play was to compare the ruling on a player control foul before a violation to a ruling on player control foul after a violation. I just thought that it would have been simpler to demonstrate that by comparing apples to apples, having the violations be the same, be it basket interference, or goaltending, in both situations, both before and after the player control foul. |
The case play showed examples of a violation prior to a player control foul and after play control foul. If you are confused by that, shame on you after all these years of officiating. If you are not confused, we don't need you to play proxy for new officials. Let them ask their own questions.
Let new officials learn. Don't dominate the room. Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk |
Basket Interference And Goaltending ...
Quote:
Wondering why the NFHS took that approach, maybe to kill two birds with one stone, jamming both basket interference and goaltending into one casebook play, with one rationale based on something not being a try, a rationale that doesn't quite fit the other violation. |
Quote:
Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk |
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:44am. |