Violation or not?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett

To be considered a "try", the ball does not have to hit the backboard or rim. The only qualification is that, in the opinion of the official, it was a legitimate try for goal.

Definitely, one of the most misunderstood rules. Right BillyBob, er, I mean BillyMac?

Yep, and the flip side of this is 99% of the time when it hits the backboard or rim, it's considered a try regardless of the player's intent.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Yep, and the flip side of this is 99% of the time when it hits the backboard or rim, it's considered a try regardless of the player's intent.

I'm fine with that. But that's not the rationale given in 9.5, which says that the pass off one's own backboard is allowed because it's team "equipment."

[Adam]

I really don't get that either, to be honest.

[VaCoach]

I must agree with Snaqwells, the word "equipment" in the case book, makes no sense to me. I have always thought that a "try for goal" allows the player to rebound and dribble again, regardless of did it hit the backboard or not. Case book says to throw the ball against the backboard will allow and offensive player to dribble again. I need clarification on is this the "rule" or not!!

[Adam]

Originally Posted by VaCoach

I must agree with Snaqwells, the word "equipment" in the case book, makes no sense to me. I have always thought that a "try for goal" allows the player to rebound and dribble again, regardless of did it hit the backboard or not. Case book says to throw the ball against the backboard will allow and offensive player to dribble again. I need clarification on is this the "rule" or not!!

Yes, it's the rule.

[26 Year Gap]

Props to the player if he can do that without one of the other nine players getting to the ball first.