LGP Under the Basket?

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

Do I have that right, Scrappy?

Seems right to me.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

Well, if there was no airborne shooter, then B1 could foul A1 after the shot is released, and before A1 lands, and it would have to be considered a common foul, not a shooting foul. But, because A1 is still an airborne shooter, they would still shoot FT(s).

Do I have that right, Scrappy?

What if the foul was "on the floor?"

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

What if the foul was "on the floor?"

Then charge the floor with the foul, and move on with the game.

You kill me, Snaqs.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

Then charge the floor with the foul, and move on with the game.

You kill me, Snaqs.

You gonna call that on the floor? It wasn't moving (except for Padgett's cruise ship, which wasn't involved with this play).

Go ahead and make that call. It's your funeral.

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

You gonna call that on the floor? It wasn't moving (except for Padgett's cruise ship, which wasn't involved with this play).

Go ahead and make that call. It's your funeral.

Hey, part of the floor is OOB, so since it doesn't have legal position, it can be stationary and still get called for the foul.

Or so I'm told.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

Hey, part of the floor is OOB, so since it doesn't have legal position, it can be stationary and still get called for the foul.

Or so I'm told.

Oh boy, here we go....

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

It's your funeral.

Uh-oh.

[chartrusepengui]

Hey, part of the floor is OOB, so since it doesn't have legal position, it can be stationary and still get called for the foul.

I disagree - since part of the floor is OOB - it's just a violation occurring prior to any foul

[M&M Guy]

(Shhh...don't tell anyone - we're accidentally having fun.)

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by chartrusepengui

I disagree - since part of the floor is OOB - it's just a violation occurring prior to any foul

Ah, but it is only a violation if the floor is OOB for an unauthorized reason. Isn't the floor allowed to be OOB? After all, a player would not have any support on a throw-in otherwise.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

Ah, but it is only a violation if the floor is OOB for an unauthorized reason. Isn't the floor allowed to be OOB? After all, a player would not have any support on a throw-in otherwise.

I still say as long as it's not moving, it can't be called for a foul.

As long as the reason is authorized, and I think "by design" is an authorized reason, it can't be called for a violation.

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

I still say as long as it's not moving, it can't be called for a foul.

Normally I would agree with you, but there were some that were pretty adamant about this position.

Now, perhaps in CA with their numerous earthquakes, this isn't really an issue?

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

As long as the reason is authorized, and I think "by design" is an authorized reason, it can't be called for a violation.

Agreed.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

Ah, but it is only a violation if the floor is OOB for an unauthorized reason.

Something wrong with the building code?

[Back In The Saddle]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

Ah, but it is only a violation if the floor is OOB for an unauthorized reason. Isn't the floor allowed to be OOB? After all, a player would not have any support on a throw-in otherwise.

If you can't be an athlete, at least be an athletic supporter.

The floor must extend at least 2 inches OOB on all four sides, otherwise you'd have no OOB lines. And with no OOB lines, what would we have to argue about?