The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jun 21, 2004, 11:18pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Just north of hell
Posts: 9,250
Send a message via AIM to Dan_ref
Quote:
Originally posted by blindzebra
[B}

Where is your rule support?

[/B]
Take a look at how the rules define guarding. That i smy rule support, as I have been claiming since about page 2 of this thread.

"Guarding is the act of legally placing the body in the PATH...."

Maybe to you PATH means the direction you think something SHOULD be going.

To me it means the direction something IS going.

Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jun 21, 2004, 11:26pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Just north of hell
Posts: 9,250
Send a message via AIM to Dan_ref
Quote:
Originally posted by ChuckElias
Quote:
Originally posted by blindzebra
The count continues until A1 gets PAST B1, whichever direction that occurs.
BZ, I think Dan's point on this statement is that if A1 has turned and is dribbling directly away from B1, then A1 is past B1. If they were having a race, A1 would be winning.
Two Diet Cokes for you!

Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jun 22, 2004, 12:16am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 2,674
Quote:
Originally posted by Dan_ref
Quote:
Originally posted by blindzebra
[B}

Where is your rule support?
Take a look at how the rules define guarding. That i smy rule support, as I have been claiming since about page 2 of this thread.

"Guarding is the act of legally placing the body in the PATH...."

Maybe to you PATH means the direction you think something SHOULD be going.

To me it means the direction something IS going.

[/B]
You still have not answered Chuck's A1 backing up, or my parallel path question and how they apply to closely guarded. WHY? Neither have B1 directly in the path of A1.

I still say under your interp, you can never have a 5 second
count. A1 just needs to turn away every 4 seconds. How does that fit the intent of the rule?

FYI, I spoke with Bill Kennedy tonight, so I asked him how he calls it. He said by LGP, within 6 feet, and actively guarding. He also said, that it is silly to expect B1 to defend a boundary and that the direction A1 is moving does not matter.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jun 22, 2004, 12:20am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Just north of hell
Posts: 9,250
Send a message via AIM to Dan_ref
Quote:
Originally posted by blindzebra

FYI, I spoke with Bill Kennedy tonight, so I asked him how he calls it. He said by LGP, within 6 feet, and actively guarding. He also said, that it is silly to expect B1 to defend a boundary and that the direction A1 is moving does not matter.
How nice for you and Bill Kennedy.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jun 22, 2004, 12:27am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 2,674
Quote:
Originally posted by Dan_ref
Quote:
Originally posted by blindzebra

FYI, I spoke with Bill Kennedy tonight, so I asked him how he calls it. He said by LGP, within 6 feet, and actively guarding. He also said, that it is silly to expect B1 to defend a boundary and that the direction A1 is moving does not matter.
How nice for you and Bill Kennedy.
Why not answer the questions Dan?
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jun 22, 2004, 12:34am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Just north of hell
Posts: 9,250
Send a message via AIM to Dan_ref
Quote:
Originally posted by blindzebra
Quote:
Originally posted by Dan_ref
Quote:
Originally posted by blindzebra

FYI, I spoke with Bill Kennedy tonight, so I asked him how he calls it. He said by LGP, within 6 feet, and actively guarding. He also said, that it is silly to expect B1 to defend a boundary and that the direction A1 is moving does not matter.
How nice for you and Bill Kennedy.
Why not answer the questions Dan?
I already explained why the questions are irrelevant.

They have nothing to do with the wording of the rule.

But apparently Bob Kennedy answered your questions. Just do what he told you to do.
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jun 22, 2004, 01:25am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 2,674
Quote:
Originally posted by Dan_ref
Quote:
Originally posted by blindzebra
Quote:
Originally posted by Dan_ref
Quote:
Originally posted by blindzebra

FYI, I spoke with Bill Kennedy tonight, so I asked him how he calls it. He said by LGP, within 6 feet, and actively guarding. He also said, that it is silly to expect B1 to defend a boundary and that the direction A1 is moving does not matter.
How nice for you and Bill Kennedy.
Why not answer the questions Dan?
I already explained why the questions are irrelevant.

They have nothing to do with the wording of the rule.

But apparently Bob Kennedy answered your questions. Just do what he told you to do.
It's Bill Kennedy, and you have said they are irrelevant, but that does not make it so.

You have said in the turning away and moving away from the basket that the count ends because B1 is no longer in the path.

In Chuck's play there is no path either, because A1 is still moving away. Under your interpretation is there still a count?

In my play B1 is sliding with A1, but is not directly in front, so there is no path. Do you have a count?

Another question, what is the intent of the closely guarded rule?

If path is required, isn't all A1 has to do is keep turning away from B1 to stop the count? How does that fit your thinking on the intent of the rule?
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jun 22, 2004, 04:08am
In Memoriam
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Hell
Posts: 20,211
Quote:
Originally posted by blindzebra
Quote:
Originally posted by Dan_ref
Quote:
Originally posted by blindzebra
[B}

Where is your rule support?
Take a look at how the rules define guarding. That i smy rule support, as I have been claiming since about page 2 of this thread.

"Guarding is the act of legally placing the body in the PATH...."

Maybe to you PATH means the direction you think something SHOULD be going.

To me it means the direction something IS going.
You still have not answered Chuck's A1 backing up, or my parallel path question and how they apply to closely guarded. WHY? Neither have B1 directly in the path of A1.

I still say under your interp, you can never have a 5 second
count. A1 just needs to turn away every 4 seconds. How does that fit the intent of the rule?

FYI, I spoke with Bill Kennedy tonight, so I asked him how he calls it. He said by LGP, within 6 feet, and actively guarding. He also said, that it is silly to expect B1 to defend a boundary and that the direction A1 is moving does not matter. [/B]
While I certainly hate to interject myself into an argument between Junior and the Codgerly Crotch( or was it vice/versa?), can I make a point without worrying about having the wrath of you two fall on my head? You know how much I hate confrontation and arguments.

If A1 changes direction- sideways, backwards, etc,- isn't A1 also changing or altering his path at the same time? There's nothing in the rule book that says that the dribbler's "path" had to remain in a straight line. And if the defender similary moves sideways, forwards, etc. as the dribbler is going sideways, backwards, etc. in his altered path, and the defender still continually remains within 6 feet of the dribbler, hasn't the defender met the concepts contained in Rule 4-10 (staying within 6 feet of the dribbler) and also Rule 4-23-3a&b (moving laterally or obliquely with the dribbler while not being required at the same time to be continuously facing the dribbler)?

Of course if you disagree, feel free to continue for another week or two. I've got plenty of popcorn.

Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jun 22, 2004, 04:11am
In Memoriam
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Hell
Posts: 20,211
Quote:
Originally posted by Dan_ref
[/B]
Two Diet Cokes for you!

[/B][/QUOTE]You'd better drive then.
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jun 22, 2004, 04:40am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 2,674
Quote:
Originally posted by Jurassic Referee
Quote:
Originally posted by blindzebra
Quote:
Originally posted by Dan_ref
Quote:
Originally posted by blindzebra
[B}

Where is your rule support?
Take a look at how the rules define guarding. That i smy rule support, as I have been claiming since about page 2 of this thread.

"Guarding is the act of legally placing the body in the PATH...."

Maybe to you PATH means the direction you think something SHOULD be going.

To me it means the direction something IS going.
You still have not answered Chuck's A1 backing up, or my parallel path question and how they apply to closely guarded. WHY? Neither have B1 directly in the path of A1.

I still say under your interp, you can never have a 5 second
count. A1 just needs to turn away every 4 seconds. How does that fit the intent of the rule?

FYI, I spoke with Bill Kennedy tonight, so I asked him how he calls it. He said by LGP, within 6 feet, and actively guarding. He also said, that it is silly to expect B1 to defend a boundary and that the direction A1 is moving does not matter.
While I certainly hate to interject myself into an argument between Junior and the Codgerly Crotch( or was it vice/versa?), can I make a point without worrying about having the wrath of you two fall on my head? You know how much I hate confrontation and arguments.

If A1 changes direction- sideways, backwards, etc,- isn't A1 also changing or altering his path at the same time? There's nothing in the rule book that says that the dribbler's "path" had to remain in a straight line. And if the defender similary moves sideways, forwards, etc. as the dribbler is going sideways, backwards, etc. in his altered path, and the defender still continually remains within 6 feet of the dribbler, hasn't the defender met the concepts contained in Rule 4-10 (staying within 6 feet of the dribbler) and also Rule 4-23-3a&b (moving laterally or obliquely with the dribbler while not being required at the same time to be continuously facing the dribbler)?

Of course if you disagree, feel free to continue for another week or two. I've got plenty of popcorn.

[/B]
Interject all you like, since you have agreed with me, so far.

As badly as the rule book is written and laid out, I just can't see any sense in taking something this ambiguous as gospel.

Dan's stance contradicts the spirit and intent of the rule. It also irks me that he is pulling an MTD, by refusing to answer the questions that point to the flaw in his arguement.

Oh well, I have the stamina of a marathon runner. I can keep it going, so get your popcorn ready.
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jun 22, 2004, 05:42am
In Memoriam
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Houghton, U.P., Michigan
Posts: 9,953
Post

Who is Bill Kennedy?
Who is John Galt?
mick
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jun 22, 2004, 08:41am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Just north of hell
Posts: 9,250
Send a message via AIM to Dan_ref
Quote:
Originally posted by Jurassic Referee
Quote:
Originally posted by blindzebra
Quote:
Originally posted by Dan_ref
Quote:
Originally posted by blindzebra
[B}

Where is your rule support?
Take a look at how the rules define guarding. That i smy rule support, as I have been claiming since about page 2 of this thread.

"Guarding is the act of legally placing the body in the PATH...."

Maybe to you PATH means the direction you think something SHOULD be going.

To me it means the direction something IS going.
You still have not answered Chuck's A1 backing up, or my parallel path question and how they apply to closely guarded. WHY? Neither have B1 directly in the path of A1.

I still say under your interp, you can never have a 5 second
count. A1 just needs to turn away every 4 seconds. How does that fit the intent of the rule?

FYI, I spoke with Bill Kennedy tonight, so I asked him how he calls it. He said by LGP, within 6 feet, and actively guarding. He also said, that it is silly to expect B1 to defend a boundary and that the direction A1 is moving does not matter.
While I certainly hate to interject myself into an argument between Junior and the Codgerly Crotch( or was it vice/versa?), can I make a point without worrying about having the wrath of you two fall on my head?
[/b]

No! Now shut up & go away, I don't want to talk to you no more, you empty-headed animal, food trough wiper. I fart in your general direction. You mother was a hamster and your father smelt of elderberries.

Quote:

If A1 changes direction- sideways, backwards, etc,- isn't A1 also changing or altering his path at the same time? There's nothing in the rule book that says that the dribbler's "path" had to remain in a straight line.


Are you still here? Of course the path doesn't have to stay the same...but by definition the person guarding is required to be in the path.

Now go away before I taunt you a second time!
Quote:


And if the defender similary moves sideways, forwards, etc. as the dribbler is going sideways, backwards, etc. in his altered path, and the defender still continually remains within 6 feet of the dribbler, hasn't the defender met the concepts contained in Rule 4-10 (staying guarding within 6 feet of the dribbler) and also Rule 4-23-3a&b (moving laterally or obliquely with the dribbler while not being required at the same time to be continuously facing the dribbler)?


I fixed it for ya
Quote:


Of course if you disagree, feel free to continue for another week or two. I've got plenty of popcorn.

Enjoy your popcorn and don't forget to save some of it for Ben Kennedy....mumble mumble cough i hope you choke on it you old bas.....cough cough....
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jun 22, 2004, 08:47am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Just north of hell
Posts: 9,250
Send a message via AIM to Dan_ref
Quote:
Originally posted by blindzebra
Quote:
Originally posted by Dan_ref
Quote:
Originally posted by blindzebra
Quote:
Originally posted by Dan_ref
Quote:
Originally posted by blindzebra

FYI, I spoke with Bill Kennedy tonight, so I asked him how he calls it. He said by LGP, within 6 feet, and actively guarding. He also said, that it is silly to expect B1 to defend a boundary and that the direction A1 is moving does not matter.
How nice for you and Bill Kennedy.
Why not answer the questions Dan?
I already explained why the questions are irrelevant.

They have nothing to do with the wording of the rule.

But apparently Bob Kennedy answered your questions. Just do what he told you to do.
It's Bill Kennedy, and you have said they are irrelevant, but that does not make it so.

You have said in the turning away and moving away from the basket that the count ends because B1 is no longer in the path.

No, what I have said is the rule book says it's irrelevant. I have not said a word about my own *opinion*, because *my opinion* does not dictate what the rule book *says*.

Maybe yours does, but not mine.

BTW, my apologies to Brad Kennedy
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jun 22, 2004, 09:03am
In Memoriam
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Hell
Posts: 20,211
Quote:
Originally posted by Dan_ref
[/b]
No! Now shut up & go away, I don't want to talk to you no more, you empty-headed animal, food trough wiper. I fart in your general direction. You mother was a hamster and your father smelt of elderberries.

[/B][/QUOTE] Well!!! That's the LAST time that I'll sell YOU a dead parrot!

Btw, I'm not leaving either until I find out whointhehell Bruce Kennedy is. And I don't have a clue whereinthehell John Galt popped outa either. Inquiring minds need to know!

Now I'm going to put the popcorn on.
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jun 22, 2004, 09:12am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Just north of hell
Posts: 9,250
Send a message via AIM to Dan_ref
Quote:
Originally posted by Jurassic Referee
Quote:
Originally posted by Dan_ref

No! Now shut up & go away, I don't want to talk to you no more, you empty-headed animal, food trough wiper. I fart in your general direction. You mother was a hamster and your father smelt of elderberries.

[/B]
Well!!! That's the LAST time that I'll sell YOU a dead parrot!

Btw, I'm not leaving either until I find out whointhehell Bruce Kennedy is. And I don't have a clue whereinthehell John Galt popped outa either. Inquiring minds need to know!

Now I'm going to put the popcorn on. [/B][/QUOTE]

No no...it's not dead, it's just resting.

And you should really be ashamed of yourself for not knowing who Bart Kennedy is!
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


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



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:33am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1