She "kicked" it, and then I kicked it

[Adam]

Her hands didn't fail. They couldn't get to the floor quickly enough, so she purposefully used her legs to trap the ball and buy herself some time.

[bigdogrunnin]

So, she intentionally contacted the ball with her legs, AND gained an advantage by doing so. You wouldn't consider that a violation?

NFHS Rule 4-29 [Kicking the ball is intentionally striking with any part of the leg or foot.], and Rule 9-4 [A player shall not travel with the ball, as in 4-44, intentionally kick it, as in 4-29, strike it with the fist or cause it to enter and pass through the basket from below.].

The player consciously and intentionally moved her legs to stop or catch the ball. TWEET! Violation. Coach may not like it, but it would seem to be the right call.

[mick]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Her hands didn't fail. They couldn't get to the floor quickly enough, so she purposefully used her legs to trap the ball and buy herself some time.

I dunno! I dunno! I dunno!

[Adam]

Originally Posted by mick

I dunno! I dunno! I dunno!

It's one of those location plays. You had to be there.

[blindzebra]

If only the rule makers would use the correct words when they write the rules.

Kicking is intentionally contacting the ball with any part of your leg.

Remove the violent term of striking and the intent of the rule becomes clear.

[HawkeyeCubP]

Originally Posted by blindzebra

If only the rule makers would use the correct words when they write the rules.

Kicking is intentionally contacting the ball with any part of your leg.

Remove the violent term of striking and the intent of the rule becomes clear.

Seconded..............

[Smitty]

Originally Posted by blindzebra

If only the rule makers would use the correct words when they write the rules.

Kicking is intentionally contacting the ball with any part of your leg.

Remove the violent term of striking and the intent of the rule becomes clear.

Forgive me - I don't have my books with me. Does the rulebook ever actually say "contacting" or does it only say "striking"? There's a big difference in my eyes between those two words, so I'm still as confused as Mick about trapping the ball between the legs and how that relates to the intent of the rule.

[Adam]

Smitty,
The rule book says "striking." However, the NCAA Ruling on this says pretty clearly that trapping the ball with the legs fits the definition. HS refs generally defer to this interpretation due to the lack of an official interpretation from the Fed.

In my scenario, picture a hockey goalie squeezing his shins together to prevent the puck from going between his legs. That's what the player did in my game. The ball actually bounced off of one leg (while she was moving them together to redirect the ball) before she got it trapped, while she was moving her hands down to grab it.

[Smitty]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Smitty,
The rule book says "striking." However, the NCAA Ruling on this says pretty clearly that trapping the ball with the legs fits the definition. HS refs generally defer to this interpretation due to the lack of an official interpretation from the Fed.

In my scenario, picture a hockey goalie squeezing his shins together to prevent the puck from going between his legs. That's what the player did in my game. The ball actually bounced off of one leg (while she was moving them together to redirect the ball) before she got it trapped, while she was moving her hands down to grab it.

I totally understand the scenario and I know that probably most people would call this a kick - I just don't see it clearly being so based on the wording of the NFHS rule. I didn't realize that the NCAA ruling actually referenced this exact scenario, so that would definitely make me lean more toward that way of thinking. It's difficult to back it up with an explanation based on that darn "striking" word, though, in a purely NFHS scenario. I would be much happier if they changed "striking" to "contacting". Thanks for the NCAA interpretation.

[mick]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Smitty,
The rule book says "striking." However, the NCAA Ruling on this says pretty clearly that trapping the ball with the legs fits the definition. HS refs generally defer to this interpretation due to the lack of an official interpretation from the Fed.

Generally ?
C'mon, Snaq !
I can think of at least one or two guys that have never seen, or heard, that interpretation.

[mick]

Originally Posted by blindzebra

If only the rule makers would use the correct words when they write the rules.

Kicking is intentionally contacting the ball with any part of your leg.

Remove the violent term of striking and the intent of the rule becomes clear.

If Washington had drowned crossing the Potomac, we may all be speaking English.

9-4 "strike it with fist" is a violation. Is contact with fist a violation?

[HawkeyeCubP]

Originally Posted by mick

9-4 "strike it with fist" is a violation. Is contact with fist a violation?

I can't think of a situation where it shouldn't be.

[mick]

Originally Posted by HawkeyeCubP

I can't think of a situation where it shouldn't be.

A pass hits a running player on the back of a closed hand....

[blindzebra]

Originally Posted by mick

If Washington had drowned crossing the Potomac, we may all be speaking English.

9-4 "strike it with fist" is a violation. Is contact with fist a violation?

Two entirely different issues.

Kicking the ball is gaining an advantage by extending your reach, making it easier to defend a pass, or in this case moving and/or stopping the ball so you can grab it.

Striking with the fist is all about the safety issue of fists flying on the court.

[mick]

Originally Posted by blindzebra

Two entirely different issues.

Kicking the ball is gaining an advantage by extending your reach, making it easier to defend a pass, or in this case moving and/or stopping the ball so you can grab it.

Striking with the fist is all about the safety issue of fists flying on the court.

'Zactly !
One is hittin' and the other is gittin'.