oh no, another screen question (NBA rules not helpful)

[davidrmoran]

Thank you all again so very much for something that is tiresome for you, it's clear, and for good reason. I really appreciate it.

I never would have raised the query yet again if it had not been for that poorly (patchily) written text in the actual NBA rules, with strangely no mention of contact, which is quoted to lead off the discussion at the top.

I am trying to find a way to write the NBA to suggest adding the word 'contact' to make part 4 the same contextually as the three parts before it.

Thanks again. Surely this will never come up again, haha.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by davidrmoran

Thank you all again so very much for something that is tiresome for you, it's clear, and for good reason. I really appreciate it.

Honestly, David, I don't mind answer an old question for a person who honestly wants to know the correct rule. That's never a problem. The problem is the guys who come here to complain that their ref "obviously" blew a call, when the poster obviously doesn't know the rule. I hope you'll come back often.

I am trying to find a way to write the NBA

I can't help you there, though.

Thanks again. Surely this will never come up again, haha.

Uh-huh.

[Adam]

Actually, the wording is similar in high school rules, IIRC. You just have to know that you can't have a foul without contact, and you can't have a violation because it isn't defined as such.