Penalty for unauthorized leaving floor

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

They just ARE a big deal. If you disagree, I can't convince you otherwise. But I am sure that they are a big deal.

Did someone tell you that or did you just arrive at this conclusion on your own?

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Did someone tell you that or did you just arrive at this conclusion on your own?

Bob Jenkins made me say it.

Are you saying that you would ignore an out of bounds violation if you deemed it to be "minor"? IOW, you disagree that boundary lines are a big deal? Or are you just uncomfortable with my lack of rationale? Or is something else going on that I'm missing?

[Nevadaref]

I've expressed no reasoning for my questioning in this thread and you haven't articulated any reasoning for your expressed opinions in this thread.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

I've expressed no reasoning for my questioning in this thread and you haven't articulated any reasoning for your expressed opinions in this thread.

I agree. So is that it, then?

Ok, if you push me on it, I would probably agree with Bob's attempt at explaining it. Everyone can see that he stepped on the boundary line, and it's not something that is a judgment call. That might be why you "have to call that". But I think that boundary lines are a big deal, even if it's not an "obvious" call.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

I agree. So is that it, then?

Do you care to give a reason for your belief?

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Do you care to give a reason for your belief?

I've said this now about 5 times. There isn't a reason. That's what makes it "arbitrary"! If you disagree, I can't convince you. They just ARE a big deal. Just like I can't give you a solid reason for saying that the palming in the backcourt (while obvious) is NOT a big deal. It just isn't. Sorry I can't be more helpful.

(I edited my previous post to reflect Bob's comments, but you quoted before I finished editing.)

[Nevadaref]

What if someone else said the boundary line violations are NOT a big deal? There's no reason for saying that the person just does.

It sure would be fun to see the two of you work a game together.

[chartrusepengui]

palming the ball is really a judgement of exactly where the official sees or doesn't see the hand to ball relationship at any given moment. It is ever changing. However - the lines on the floor are static - they don't change. I think that is why they are such a big deal. I might let the carry go - but would whistle the boundry line violation.

To those that would not whistle the boundry line - what about a backcourt violation where player A was not being pressured. He was backing up calling a play and his heel was on the division line? Since there was no pressure or ball advancement do you decide not to call that?