Originally Posted by Camron Rust

You want citations, here are citations:

Rules Fundamental #7: The only infractions for which points are awarded are goaltending by the defense...

Explain me that! How can the defense commit goaltending at all if there is no defense after the shot is released????


Rule 4-23...Guarding is the act of legally placing the body in the path of an offensive opponent.

Are you saying you can't "guard" the team with the ball during a throwin? Are you saying that since you can't guard, you can't have LGP, and therefore the non-throwing team simply can't ever have a postion which would allow them to draw a charging foul (not a PC, just a common charging foul) against the throwing team? Are you saying that the team without the ball must continue to get out of the throwing team's way until someone catches the ball?

Rule 8-4-a During a free throw....Marked lane spaces may be occupied by a maximum of four defensive and two offensive players.

After the FT is released, is it still during a FT? If so, those players are still offensive and defensive players. Or are you saying they must magically evaporate from the lane between the release and when the FT ends since only 4 defensive and 2 offensive players are allowed to be there?

Even if it is not explicity spelled out in the book, these three citations demonstrate that a team can be considered to be on defense even when the other team doesn't have team control.

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

To my dearly beloved friend, Scrappy......

After you return from wherever you go when you're pouting, would you please answer the following question?

If a throw-in by A1 is tipped by a player(defensive, offensive--I really don't care what you call them), and a B player then gains possession of the tipped ball while in mid-air after jumping from his frontcourt, is it a violation for that B player to land in the back court holding the ball? Iow, do you agree or disagree that the above play of jar's is not a backcourt violation?

That's all I want to know.

Camron, Junior....please put on the record also whether you think that this is a violation or not.

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

I would say that B2 is a defensive player on this play and thus it is not a violation. But what the heck do I know!?!? :eek:

Originally Posted by Dan_ref

It does if you accept the meaning of offense as the team in conrol of the ball and defense as the other team (we can agree there are only 2 teams, correct? I mean...in you opinion as an expert.)

See...it's all about meaning.

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

And my only point in the post you quoted was that Jurassic was arguing badly. I was not discussing offense or defense or semantics. I get it, I understand the discussion. I was making a different point.

As I've already said twice, I honestly don't know what the NFHS rulemakers intend in this regard. I think Bktballref's view is probably correct, but I think there are legitimate points on both sides.

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

I agree.

And, to define "defense" , I think you need to define "offense". I'd define it as "(a) The team with team control of the ball. This team remains on offense until team control is lost. -OR- (b) The team with teh ball at their disposal. This team remains on offense until either team gains Team Control of the ball."

If one team is on Offense, the other is on Defense. If neither team is on Offense (during a Jump Ball or a Try, for example), then neither Team is on Defense

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Soooooo......putting aside the semantics issue

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Soooooo......putting aside the semantics issue.....in your opinion, is that play described previously a violation or not?

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Frankly, I can't believe the thread is 140 posts long. I can believe there's disagreement, I don't know why there's no A2D.

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

I don't know why there's no A2D.

Originally Posted by Zoochy

OK bob, you've got me. What's A2D?
:confused:

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

I say it's "Agree To Disagree".

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

I say it's "Agree To Disagree".

JR or Nevada will be along soon (and often) to claim that it's something else. ;)

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

I looked, but I can't find "agree" defined anywhere in the rule book.

Originally Posted by Dan_ref

It's more basic than that.

Look under rule 4 for the definition of "to"...aint there my friend, aint there.