Part 1 - question #64

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Just because someone several posts before mentioned a center doesn't necessarily mean the rest of the comments were exclusively about 3-man. Without further comment, someone could interpret his statements to apply to 2-man.

In fact, Zoochy mentioned bouncing the ball up the sideline by the lead. So, he was possibly also talking about 2-man.

You must really need some coffee/sugar/something because you are starting to read and reason like Rut.

Let's recap and trace the discussion:

1. Zoochy writes post #11. Therein he mentions the Center, so he is obviously discussing 3-man. He continues to write about the Lead bouncing the ball for a sideline throw-in below the FT line extended.

2. I quote from his post (#11) and respond DIRECTLY TO his statement about the Lead administering a sideline throw-in by saying that is NOT an NFHS mechanic, but rather an NCAA mechanic. I do this in post #16.

3. In the very next post in the thread, #17, you question the correctness of my statement, clearly without reading Zoochy's entire post carefully enough to grasp that the two of us are discussion 3-man.

4. Bob jumps in at post #19 and tries to clue you in that we are talking about 3-man.

5. You completely ignore Bob and continue to along in post #20 by quoting the 2-man mechanic.

6. I come back in post #27 and tell you that you made a faulty assumption by thinking that we were discussing 2-man. I didn't say that anything that you wrote other than post #17 was incorrect. I just implied that what you wrote doesn't apply and that you should have known that. As proof that we are thinking 3-man, I quote from Zoochy's post (#11) and point out that he mentions the Center official. You definitely seem to have failed to notice that when jumping in.

7. Despite that you cling to your position with Rut-like tenacity which exhibits no sense of logical reasoning by again replying in the very next post (#28) that simply because someone sometime before mentioned the Center official doesn't mean that any of the other comments were necessarily about 3-man. HELLO...McFLY!!!! The post that mentioned the CENTER OFFICIAL was the very one that I quoted and to which I directly responded!!! I clearly wasn't directing my statement at any of the other comments. By quoting Zoochy, it should have been crystal clear exactly to whom I was writing and that BOTH of us were talking about 3-man.
Finally, the best part is that you finish with a classic example of circular Rut reasoning by actually stating that the very mechanic Zoochy mentions that started this whole sequence when I responded that it isn't proper at the NFHS level (FOR 3-MAN--which was clearly the context in which it was written) is really evidence that he was talking about 2-man!

Lah--me!

Congratulations, you are now an honorary Rut poster.