Re: Adjudge the act.
 

I know when the rule changes came out, this was the one that most of us went, "I really want to see the case book play on that one." Mainly for the shooting situation. They left the door open to mis-apply this and for officials to start whacking defenders left and right, for playing defense with no unsporting intent.

Re: Re: Adjudge the act.
 

blindzebra,
I was "one of us" waiting to see something of an enlightning nature with this new rule, but as does happen with some of the new rules, the previews were more exciting than the event.
Many of the posters (back then) indicated it wouldn't amount to anything, and hey, ... they were right! :)
mick

it's really not that hard to tell if D is trying to "get a hand up" or if he's trying to block vision. When a coach says, "get a hand in the face" it's because it's alot easier and sounds better than saying; "get a hand near their hand". It means the same; affect the shot.

about a month ago ina summer league boys V game right in front of D's coach: O squares up to the basket and D is standing about 3-4 feet away with his fingers closed and wrist turned sideways and hand in O's face (clearly trying to block vision). Rather than immediate T, I opt to warn. Player stops but coach starts in, "since when is that a rule"? I offer: "the rule says your player gets a T but just like a 3 seconds call, we'd rather warn first". after the game, I heard the player comment to his coach "I thought you said we should do that". DOES ANYONE AGREE OR DISAGREE WITH THIS WARNING?

I think a warning is a great way to handle this situation. There is usually a verbal warning or a hand up "stop sign" for most Technicals anyway. This would stop the players from doing this especially in the beginning of the season.

Since it is a new rule...I think a warning is entirely appropriate since so many players have been doing this for so long.