Really had to think about this call

[Mark Padgett]

This weekend, I had a partner ask me what I would do in the following scenario that he had a few weeks earlier.

A1 has the ball in deep near his own endline. He wants to bounce pass to A2 who is on the other side of the lane, also near the endline. B1 is in between them. A1 throws the ball toward the court to bounce it to A2 and, according to my friend, the ball hits the endline and B1's foot, which is touching the endline, at exactly the same time. That is, part of the ball hits the line and part of the ball hits the foot.

I tried to envision this in my mind and I guess I got it, sort of. When he asked me what the call should be, I told him that if you were extremely anal, you would rule that both A1 and B1 caused the ball to go OOB simultaneously, so you would go to the AP arrow, just as you would if any two players from opposite teams hit the ball OOB at the same time.

He said he thought of that, but felt he would probably get both coaches mad at the same time, so he just ruled that the ball hit B1's foot while the foot was on the line and he gave the ball back to team A. He didn't think he could call a kick on B1, because he never moved his leg, but since everyone saw the ball at least hit his foot and that his foot was on the line, my friend figured no one would complain about the call - and no news is good news. It turned out he was right about no one complaining.

What do you guys (and Juulie, too ) think?

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

I think that your partner was very quick witted and did a great job on the play. Can I borrow him as a partner?

[Bart Tyson]

Good call

[Mark Dexter]

Are A1 and A2 inbounds?

[Lotto]

Originally posted by Mark Padgett
A1 throws the ball toward the court to bounce it to A2 and, according to my friend, the ball hits the endline and B1's foot, which is touching the endline, at exactly the same time.

I remember someone once telling me that no two things ever happen at exactly the same time. I'd make a decision about which one happened first and call that. I'd also probably decide that the ball hit the foot first, for the same reasons mentioned above.

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by Lotto

I remember someone once telling me that no two things ever happen at exactly the same time. I'd make a decision about which one happened first and call that. I'd also probably decide that the ball hit the foot first, for the same reasons mentioned above.

Hey, I'm with you, except I'm not going decide now what
my call would be. Reminds me of a bang-bang at first
base: either safe or out, no such thing as a tie.

[williebfree]

Seems pretty easy.... Strong whistle, Confident point in A1's direction. Put the ball in play.

[Slider]

Originally posted by Mark Padgett
I tried to envision this in my mind and I guess I got it, sort of. When he asked me what the call should be, I told him that if you were extremely anal, you would rule that both A1 and B1 caused the ball to go OOB simultaneously, so you would go to the AP arrow, just as you would if any two players from opposite teams hit the ball OOB at the same time.

He said he thought of that, but felt he would probably get both coaches mad at the same time, so he just ruled that the ball hit B1's foot while the foot was on the line and he gave the ball back to team A. He didn't think he could call a kick on B1, because he never moved his leg, but since everyone saw the ball at least hit his foot and that his foot was on the line, my friend figured no one would complain about the call - and no news is good news. It turned out he was right about no one complaining.

What do you guys (and Juulie, too ) think? [/B]

I don't see what the issue is about the AP.

Why not use it? So, one coach is as little miffed. If this call sets a coach off, he or she shouldn't be out there (and will go off at some point anyway).

[rainmaker]

Originally posted by williebfree
Seems pretty easy.... Strong whistle, Confident point in A1's direction. Put the ball in play.

I'm with wbf and Dan here. And the good news is I'm getting better at pulling this kind of thing off. My Quaker up-bringing made it difficult for the first couple of years to just whistle, call, bounce and go. I wanted to assemble a committee, discuss, analyze and come to concensus (uh..., consensus... shoot! Quaker genes are no help in the spelling department.) But I am overcoming my slow, methodical childhood patterns, and learning to be a ref! And it feels pretty good!

[rainmaker]

Originally posted by Mark Padgett
What do you guys (and Juulie, too ) think?

And don't forget Rebecca, Lori, Linda, Ms. Welch and any other women who are lurking?

[Mark Padgett]

Originally posted by rainmaker

And don't forget Rebecca, Lori, Linda, Ms. Welch and any other women who are lurking?

Wow, Juulie. You're really feeling your oats.

Get it? Get it? "Oats"? It's a Quaker joke.

No disrepect intended, but since you know me, you know I just can't help it.

[Mark Padgett]

Originally posted by Mark Dexter
Are A1 and A2 inbounds?

Yes.

[rainmaker]

Originally posted by Mark Padgett
Wow, Juulie. You're really feeling your oats.

Get it? Get it? "Oats"? It's a Quaker joke.

No disrepect intended, but since you know me, you know I just can't help it.

Mark --

I've never gone through one complete year of all 45 without at least one of these, so yes, I get it!!

You can skip the Quaker State, the Franklin Quakers, and the "Fighting Quakers". I've heard all those before, too, and no one else will think they're funny.

[Mark Padgett]

That's what I like about you, Juulie. You can take a joke. Just like the partner from Greece I worked with a while back who had a great sense of hummus.

OK - I'll get back on my meds now.

[Mark Dexter]

Originally posted by Mark Padgett
OK - I'll get back on my meds now.

I thought I told you already, Mark, they upped your dosage.

Now you have to take five of the red pills and three of the orange ones.