BTW - yes closely guarded is what I meant - I was having a brain cramp and for the life of me couldn't think "closely guarded"! sheeeeeesh!

Here it is....

http://www.dabearz.com/forums/imageh...8b76e294fb.jpg

Say what?:confused:

There is <b>no</b> "lack of action" mechanic. There used to be, many years ago, but it is long-gone from the rule book.

Its not Lack of action.. its "Not Closely Guarded". Its new I think for this season.

I just scanned that in from the 2007-2008 rule book this morning.

Um, yeah, and I'm still confused. Why did you post "not closely guarded" as being the "lack of action" mechanic when they've got absolutely nothing to do with each other? Just because someone is not being closely guarded doesn't mean that there's a lack of action.

I posted it because of this... Just helping to clarify... They were talking about it earlier in the thread.

Odd. Based on the title of this thread, I thought it was about that last guy who worked on my car.

Sorry,but what you posted didn't clarify anything. It just confused the matter. There is <b>NO</b> "lack of action" mechanic anymore. That was the point that Jeff Rutledge's was making. "Lack of action" and "not closely guarded" are completely different animals. They have nothing to do with each other.

The main difference is that "lack of action" means nothing to basketball rules, and hasn't in probably 20 years.

And Bearfanmike knows that, as do we all. But Mountaineer, who started the thread, couldn't think of the phrase "closely guarded" and asked about "lack of action" instead.

Bearfanmike was simply posting the signal that Mountaineer originally intended to talk about.

IMHO, he didn't confuse the issue at all.

Maybe not, but he confused Jurrassic.

Confusing Jurassic doesn't take a lot of action, either.

Are you serious?

Rut posted, asking what is the "what is the 'lack of action' mechanic". Bearfanmike responded to Rut's quiery by basically saying that the "lack of action" mechanic is the same as the "not being closely guarded". Now, maybe somewhere in the wonderful world of IAABO:D , you <b>might</b> find somebody that <b>might agree</b> with that statement, but I can't think of any other knowledgeable official anywhere that would.

Not being closely guarded has absolutely <b>NOTHING</b> to do with a lack of action. Are you saying otherwise, Skippy?

Yes, it's a minor point and not worth arguing about, but I also think that people should know the difference between the two.

In a word, yes. In more than a word, I stand by this statement from my previous post: "Bearfanmike was simply posting the signal that Mountaineer originally intended to talk about."

Then why did he post it as an <b>answer</b> to the question asked by Jeff as to what the "lack of action" mechanic is? I'm dumb. You tell me what the relationship is---"lack of action" to "not closely guarded". Use small words, please, and talk slow.