Rule Clarification to a play we discussed

[Self]

Originally posted by Dan_ref
If the delay warning is used yes the T comes next. [/B]

Don't you think this is harsher than a violation?

[ChuckElias]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee
Could you hurry up just a little?According to the acturial tables,I'm out of here in about fifteen years.

You're already on borrowed time, JR. I don't know how you survived the last meteor impact!!

Chuck

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by Self

Don't you think this is harsher than a violation? [/B]

No, for 2 reasons:

1. They got their warning, if they blatantly do it again it falls under "they got what they deserved"

2. After I fall off this soapbox I'm going to climb on another one entitled "point of interruption".

Seriously, I guess we'll just have to disagree. But IMO the
fed has publicized a hole in the rules concerning a play
that almost *never* happens by design, it's almost always
due to confusion or inexperience, and is rare enough.
Taking the ball away from a team for this is not right, IMO.
But I take comfort in knowing I'm right, because if Chuck
disagrees with me then I can't be wrong!

[Self]

Originally posted by Dan_ref
Seriously, I guess we'll just have to disagree. But IMO the
fed has publicized a hole in the rules concerning a play
that almost *never* happens by design, it's almost always
due to confusion or inexperience, and is rare enough.
Taking the ball away from a team for this is not right, IMO.
But I take comfort in knowing I'm right, because if Chuck
disagrees with me then I can't be wrong! [/B]

I would agree that it doesn't happen often. Also ussually at the less experienced level. At a youth level I will just reset and explain and basically give a do over. I am referring to small children. But at HS varsity and above, they should Know better that is why I have no problem with a violation.

as far as taking the ball away from a team not being right. i don't like giving a T for six men on the court, when I know that I could have prevented it. But I do according to the rules.

As far as the fed publicizing a hole in the rule I disagree. I think it was clear before and is not being interpretted correctly. The fundimental part of the throw in rule is to take the ball out of bounds. When the ball is retrived from the net it is at the disposal of the thrower unless he is tossing to a teammate for the throw in. If he turns to make a throw in up court without going out of bounds he has violated the whole concept of the rule. We will probably just have to disagree on this.

As far as the fed clarifying. They were trying to make the rule used correctly. Just like the discussion this board had on live ball technical for a fight. Rule 10-3-10 as we discussed says be charged with fighting, but that is only if there is no contact it is a technical. A swing and miss is fighting, this is when you call a flagrant T. People ignore the other rules that say to have a technical with contact the ball must be dead and interpret this one rule as fighting is a T. The fed will add to this rule next year that fighting is a T if there is no contact duirng a live ball but the player is charged with fighting. A fight during a live ball is a flagrant personal, but people use this rule incorrectly all the time.

[Edited by Self on Aug 9th, 2002 at 12:30 PM]

[ChuckElias]

Originally posted by Dan_ref
I take comfort in knowing I'm right, because if Chuck
disagrees with me then I can't be wrong!

I can tell that camp is going to be verrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrry interesting!!!

Chuck

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by ChuckElias

I can tell that camp is going to be verrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrry interesting!!!

Chuck

Maybe I'll give some kid $20 to do this to you, just to see the look on your face! (I mean the funky throw-in, not the monkey thing )

[rainmaker]

Originally posted by Dan_ref
Maybe I'll give some kid $20 to do this to you, just to see the look on your face!


(I mean the funky throw-in, not the monkey thing )

Wow, I'm glad you clarified. You had me worried there for a minute!!