LGP on Airborne Shooter

[rwest]

Originally Posted by Dan_ref

Yes I do. IMO the email exhange between JR, Peter & Mark is pretty clear but I'll agree that maybe what we have here might be less than crystal clear.

In any event I do not accept that there is any case when a player can legally move under an airborne player, period.

This is pretty basic IMO & goes beyond LGP. Do you not agree with this?

I agree that this goes beyond LGP and it is basic. I have a block. But what I can't understand is why we can't all agree that JR and Mark are asking two different questions.

Answer the following questions?

1. Is there a difference between maintaining and obtaining LGP?
2. Did Mark not say that B1 had OBTAINED LGP?
3. Did not Peter's response refer to a player who had NOT OBTAINED LGP?

If you answer yes to all of the above, then you have to agree with me that Peter's response did not clarify the question that Mark is raising. Mark is asking about a player who has obtained LGP not a player who has NOT obtained LGP.

Also, did JR's question address the LGP status of the defensive player? No. His question did not even mention LGP. Peter assumed he meant to obtain LGP. JR's and Mark's questions are totally different. Peter didn't adequately address Mark's question.

But I guess we are arguing over semantics.