Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee
Yup, it's just a very specific, completely unambiguous case play. No need to follow it.
|
Exactly! I don't follow it in this situation for the same reason I don't call basket interference here. The case is clear and unambiguous and, at the very same time, is irrelevant. It doesn't fit the play being discussed.
It's about delay of game situations...reaching through the plane, interfering with the ball after a made basket such that it takes team A extra time to get the ball. It is not about player techicals or unsportsmanlike conduct....heaving the ball into the 10th row of the bleachers.
It has elements similar to the play being discussed, bit has one important difference; the calls being "ignored" in the last seconds of a game are violations. I believe this case, or other cases, also say that a T or intentional foul SHOULD be called if the defense not only reaches through the plane but make contact with the ball or thrower.
The call I'm saying needs to be called is a T. This is more similar to a foul that is an obvious textbook intentional foul that you don't call...with 6 seconds to go letting time run out. You call intentionals rather than let the defense escalate the contact....even if it does stop the clock.
We are not to ignore everything done with the purpose of stopping the clock...only violations (even if the violation is the 2nd Delay violation). We don't have any directive to ignore player technicals. The rules committees have consistently established that a T/intentional foul is a sufficient penalty when infractions are deliberate and intended to stop the clock for an advantage.
Mon Jan 28, 2008, 06:52pm
Similar Threads
Hybrid Mode
