Legal Guarding Position

[Adam]

Originally Posted by deecee

very nimble player with very flexible ankles.

How so? Nothing says the bottom of his feet have to be touching the floor; only that his feet have to be on the floor. Lay on the floor and tell me where your feet naturally lay.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

How so? Nothing says the bottom of his feet have to be touching the floor; only that his feet have to be on the floor. Lay on the floor and tell me where your feet naturally lay.

So what you are saying is, when a player falls to the floor, their feet stay on the floor at all times?

Peace

[deecee]

this is where the rule book and common sense meet and a lot of officials get lost in the intersection.

its ok snaq and coach p thats how you can do it -- i sure as heck wont.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by deecee

this is where the rule book and common sense meet and a lot of officials get lost in the intersection.
its ok snaq and coach p thats how you can do it -- i sure as heck wont.

Didn't say that's how I'd call it, I'm only saying that an argument could be made. I'm still not sure, frankly; although it's probably a had-to-be-there thing. If the player slips momentarily and continues to actively guard the dribbler, I'll probably continue my count. If he falls flat on his face and just lays there; I'll probably stop play for an injury timeout.
Oh, and you can't accuse those of us trying to actually see what the rule says of being like Old School and then turn around and offer your comment in red; which is a lot closer to OS's rules philosophy.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Oh, and you can't accuse those of us trying to actually see what the rule says of being like Old School and then turn around and offer your comment in red; which is a lot closer to OS's rules philosophy.

The rules are not there to cover every possible situation. The casebook is supposed to clear up common and sometimes uncommon occurrences that might actually happen. If a defender falls, I do not think it is to our benefit to call something that clearly is not what the rules were made for. Unless you see something in writing that makes this very clear, I would think common sense should prevail. This has nothing to do with what OS thinks or how he forms an opinion. At the very least I would like to see something so unusual in writing before making such a big call. As I said before, I do not know many ball handlers that are just going to stand there while a defender is on their back, so I really do not see the issue either way. Just a guess on my part.

Peace

[DC_Ref12]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I do not know many ball handlers that are just going to stand there while a defender is on their back, so I really do not see the issue either way.

Exactly. Which is why I'm shocked this thread has made it to 4 pages.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by DC_Ref12

Exactly. Which is why I'm shocked this thread has made it to 4 pages.

Actually, we don't have to wonder whether a dribbler would stand there for 5 seconds. All it takes is part of a second. If B1 slips just before your hand strikes 5, are you going to make the 5 second call?
If B1 slips and gets immediately back to his feet between your second and third strike, are you going to start your count over or continue as if nothing had happened?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

The rules are not there to cover every possible situation. The casebook is supposed to clear up common and sometimes uncommon occurrences that might actually happen. If a defender falls, I do not think it is to our benefit to call something that clearly is not what the rules were made for. Unless you see something in writing that makes this very clear, I would think common sense should prevail. This has nothing to do with what OS thinks or how he forms an opinion. At the very least I would like to see something so unusual in writing before making such a big call. As I said before, I do not know many ball handlers that are just going to stand there while a defender is on their back, so I really do not see the issue either way. Just a guess on my part.

Peace

You're right, the odds of the stars aligning in such a way as to have this happen are so slim as to be practically zero. Like I said, if the defender stays down that long, I'm likely to blow it dead for injury.
If he slips (to his knees for example) and gets immediately back up all the while continuing to guard the dribbler, I see no reason to suspend or restart the count.
You're also right that the rules don't seem to address this as smoothly as I'd like, so disagreement here is to be expected.
My reference to OS was in response to deecee's invokation; because I frankly don't give a crap about how OS would rule this play.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

So what you are saying is, when a player falls to the floor, their feet stay on the floor at all times?

Peace

No, but while they're not on the floor, they're most likely airborne.