A few situations/questions

[blindzebra]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

Ref in PA - I understand what you are saying, but 4-41-2 has to do specifically with the definition of a try: "A player is trying for goal when the player has the ball and in the official's judgment is throwing or attempting to throw for goal."

5-2-1 is taking away the judgement of whether or not the player is actually attempting a try in determining whether to award 2 points or 3. If the player is behind the arc when the ball is thrown, the official does not have to determine it is a "try" in order to award 3 points. The obvious example is the alley-oop, where A1 is outside the arc and passing it to A2 for the dunk, A2 misses it, and the ball goes through the basket. It's still 3 points, even though it wasn't a "try".

1. The rules need to be cleaned up, we have countless examples of poorly written rules.

2. Yes, it isn't specifically laid out.

3. But it is clear that there isn't supposed to be a judgment between a try and a throw, so logically, a throw should end the same way a try does.

4. Logic also says that the defensive touch is talking about a defender attempting to block the try/throw immediately not touching it 15 feet away.

5. Common sense tells you that the rules intent isn't to count 3 on a pass from outside the arc, away from the basket that strikes a defender and goes in the basket.

6. Taking common sense, logical progression and the fact we have a case play in place that says we can count it as a 2, why would anyone hold onto 5-2-1 and rule a 3?