![]() |
|
|||
I may be wrong, (again) but I believe that there has been a similar discussion before, something to the effect: 9-2 Penalties 1. .......first violation ........shall result in a team warning......
Penalty: (Section 2) The ball becomes dead when the violation.....occurs. Question: The ball became dead when the opponent penetrated the plane, so how can there be a foul? Answer: (written in just another ref-eeze, may require translation) One infraction trumps the other. When two things happen at about the same time, or one thing happens that can be described in two different ways, (such as a flagrant/intentional foul....if it's flagrant, it matters not whether it was intentional) in most cases you go with the more serious penalty. I'm sure there are exceptions, and somebody will name one right away, but this is one of many small cornerstones in my slightly askew universe.
__________________
I swear, Gus, you'd argue with a possum. It'd be easier than arguing with you, Woodrow. Lonesome Dove |
|
|||
Quote:
|
|
|||
Quote:
If it all was done with a single swipe, hypothetically you still have two calls that could have been made. Let's say it was a reeeeeeally slow swipe. Hand penetrates the plane. Whistle blows. Violation. Warning to be recorded on Team B. Meanwhile hand has continued through the air and slaps A1's arm. Whistle is still blowing. Warning is instantly out the window (nobody knew it was there) because it was trumped by the foul. I rest my case. ![]()
__________________
I swear, Gus, you'd argue with a possum. It'd be easier than arguing with you, Woodrow. Lonesome Dove |
|
|||
You have heard, "See the whole play," right? This is one of those cases. The defender is penalized for the entirety of his actions, not just the first infraction committed.
Counterexample: If defender B1 swings with his left hand in an attempt to block a shot, but commits a goaltending violation. We all know that the ball becomes dead at this point. However, while still in the air, he follows this by swinging his right hand in frustration and intentionally slaps the backboard. This action is clearly worthy of a technical foul. Can we agree that most quality officials are going to call both the violation and the technical foul? ![]() |
|
|||
Quote:
The basis for this technical foul is?
__________________
I swear, Gus, you'd argue with a possum. It'd be easier than arguing with you, Woodrow. Lonesome Dove |
|
|||
Quote:
B1 leaps, blocks a shot with his left hand, hears the whistle for GT, gets mad & slaps the backboard with his right hand. All without returning to earth. Sounds like something you might see in a Bruce Lee movie.
__________________
9-11-01 http://www.fallenheroesfund.org/fallenheroes/index.php http://www.carydufour.com/marinemoms...llowribbon.jpg |
|
|||
Quote:
__________________
M&M's - The Official Candy of the Department of Redundancy Department. (Used with permission.) |
|
|||
Quote:
__________________
9-11-01 http://www.fallenheroesfund.org/fallenheroes/index.php http://www.carydufour.com/marinemoms...llowribbon.jpg |
|
|||
Quote:
Originally Posted by just another ref The basis for this technical foul is? Quote:
The ball is dead in the situation. There is no longer a try in flight.
__________________
I swear, Gus, you'd argue with a possum. It'd be easier than arguing with you, Woodrow. Lonesome Dove |
|
|||
Quote:
|
|
|||
Quote:
10-3-5b: Intentionally slapping or striking the backboard or causing the ring to vibrate while a try or tap is in flight or is touching the backboard or is in the basket or in the cylinder above the basket. There's the complete rule. After the violation the ball is dead. The only way slapping the board is a technical is if you think it is an unacceptable display of temper/bad sportsmanship/whatever. I don't see it any different than slapping the wall or the floor. (I can do both of these. I'm kinda shaky on slapping the backboard.)
__________________
I swear, Gus, you'd argue with a possum. It'd be easier than arguing with you, Woodrow. Lonesome Dove |
|
|||
Quote:
Case book play 10.3.5 says that you may call the "T" if you felt that the backboard slap was intentional and it was done to draw attention or vent frustration. Judgment call iow. |
|
|||
Quote:
But Rod Serling (aka Nevadaref) told us this is a clear, by the book T that requires no judgement at all and MUST be called! You're not saying he's wrong, are ya??
__________________
9-11-01 http://www.fallenheroesfund.org/fallenheroes/index.php http://www.carydufour.com/marinemoms...llowribbon.jpg |
![]() |
Bookmarks |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Grasping the rim during play | zebraman | Basketball | 12 | Thu Jun 24, 2004 08:30pm |
grasping the rim | Dibbs | Basketball | 6 | Tue Dec 24, 2002 10:02pm |
Grasping The Ring | APHP | Basketball | 25 | Tue Sep 10, 2002 02:22pm |
Grasping the Ring | Mike Burns | Basketball | 3 | Wed Jan 23, 2002 10:32pm |
Grasping the "Basket" | rainmaker | Basketball | 10 | Tue Jan 08, 2002 03:48am |