![]() |
If airborne A1 passes the ball instead of shooting, s/he is still an airborne shooter as it relates to a player-control foul.
I'm sitting on false. Correct? |
I have to agree. The rule defines the airborne shooter only.
|
I Agree To
Rule 4 Definitions
SECTION 1 AIRBORNE SHOOTER ART. 1 . . . An airborne shooter is a player who has released the ball on a try for a goal or has tapped the ball and has not returned to the floor. ART. 2 . . . The airborne shooter is considered to be in the act of shooting. I have to agree too, but they need to be more definate about the answer. |
Re: I Agree To
Quote:
An airborne shooter is a player who has released the ball ON A TRY. A pass is not a try. Therefor, a player who has released the ball on a pass cannot be an airborne shooter. |
Well Bob, maybe they were thinking that the airborne player had intended to shoot initially and had started continuous motion.
While I agree that the answer is false, it does make one think a little bit. I've seen players who were obviously going to shoot and then bailed out and passed the ball after they got hammered. Even though the rules don't support it, they actually were an airborne shooter before getting fouled. Z |
Quote:
|
i agree!
|
Quote:
Z |
this is one i'm having problems with, explain to me why this wouldn't be a true statement, weather passing are shooting it still could relate to the player control foul. they make some of this verbage clear as mud?
|
Quote:
He makes it very very clear. Also look up player control foul. That should clarify. Thanks David |
Quote:
If the player shoots the ball, then s/he'd be an airborne shooter (until s/he returns to the floor). If the player is fouled, you'd have a shooting foul. If the player passes the ball, s/he is an airborne player (NOT and airborne shooter) not holding or passing the ball. A foul here is a common foul. If A fouls, it won't be a PC foul. |
The reason I brought this up.....they mention Player Control.....My thought....if a guy goes airborne, looks like he's gonna shoot and passes, then crashes into a defender who legally got there, you have a push rather than a player control foul. A foul either way but the penalty could be different (shots vs. ball out of bounds).
Dumb question if you ask me. |
Quote:
As Bob said: 1) Player in air with ball. Shoots- then crashes into a defender while still airborne-->PC foul. 2) Player in air with ball. Passes- then crashes into defender while airborne-->common foul. Good point, Larksy. |
I took this as a pass/crash situation also.
|
i get it now, interesting situation to explain to the offending teams coach why the other teams shooting the bonus, i would bet most coaches would also assume this to be a player control foul.
|
give em a little credit
Quote:
That give the coaches the opinion that it is a PC when in fact it is not. But a good topic for discussion Thanks David |
I agree with David B in regards to this question being included in the test. Many officials do not have a clear interpretation of this scenario.
I also understand Zebraman's stance about the possibility of a foul during contunuation... Art. 2 supports it. |
Quote:
And, of course, as luck would have it, I made both calls. Home coach starts squawking at my partner. "How come they got FTs and we don't?!?!" He takes a TO and the R goes to explain it to him. After the TO, I take my position right next to the home coach. This was our exchange: Me: Did my partner answer your questions, Coach? Coach: Yeah, but that's a dumb rule. They shouldn't make you guys make that distinction. Me: I agree, Coach. But that's the way the rule is written. Coach: Well, then you can tell Hank Nicols to shove that rule up his @ss! Me: Coach, Hank doesn't take my calls. He laughed and that was it. Pretty funny moment for me. |
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:32pm. |