![]() |
|
|||
Re: What
Quote:
established legal guarding position and/or moves into and causes contact with a driving A1 then B1 is responsible for this illegal contact. In this case I have a foul on B1. If B1 is legal then in this play I have a travel when A1 comes down with the ball. This is what I've been saying all thread. I can't make it much simpler than that, if you want to get into a p1ssing contest over this then you'll have to do it by yourself.
__________________
9-11-01 http://www.fallenheroesfund.org/fallenheroes/index.php http://www.carydufour.com/marinemoms...llowribbon.jpg |
|
|||
Sorry to weigh in so late - just saw this today. I got a travel on this one. That brief sandwich isn't a held ball, and there is no illegal contact. Just a case of A leaving his feet, running out of space to operate, and coming back down again.
I will also say that my immediate reaction was held ball. Then I reflected on the case where A can jump, B can touch ball, and A come back down for a travel and overruled myself! So I can easily see you calling it a held ball in a game situation. And obviously, some would agree with that call anyway. |
|
|||
For those of you crying "Foul!"
Let's try and look at it this way:
A1 is standing still, B1 closely guarding, and A1 (while standing) pushes the ball forward into B1, who may or may not be moving towards A1. Is this a foul on B1 because s/he touched the ball? How 'bout if A1 repeats the above, but B1, being much much bigger and stronger, doens't move but instead A1 goes backwards. Is this a fould on B1? Do your answers change if A1 and/or B1 are in the air? I think those of us chanting travel (or jump ball for that matter - anything but a foul on B1) are wondering how there can be a foul on B1 when all s/he has touched was the ball?
__________________
Dan R. |
|
|||
Quote:
|
|
|||
![]()
Actually if you read your posts I think you will find your not as clear as you think you are. Just a matter of opinion though.
I read a question for what is written and don't read more than the question. Many of your posts were assuming more than what was just asked. To me it is simple: Just answer the question given and don't read into it..... |
|
|||
![]()
[QUOTE]Originally posted by RecRef
Quote:
|
|
|||
Quote:
I understand the airborne shooter principle - but this only applies if there is illegal contact. A does not have a landing spot until he lands. Since he didn't land on B, B wasn't in A's landing spot. Had A tucked the ball and crashed into B, he may have drawn a foul. But A let the ball hit B then lost control of body in air. There is no foul here, just a choice between a held ball and a travel. And I go with travel for the reasons I cited. |
|
|||
Quote:
![]() ![]() Chuck
__________________
Any NCAA rules and interpretations in this post are relevant for men's games only! |
|
|||
Quote:
Btw,welcome to the board. |
|
|||
Not a Foul
[QUOTE]Originally posted by ChuckElias
Quote:
|
|
|||
Quote:
Big IF in that sentence. I would agree, if the case you cited occurred. Clearly contact, clearly a foul, regardless of whether or not you call an airborne A colliding with B on the way down "A landing on B." I was merely responding to RECREF's way of saying it - and landing on, colliding with, making contact (beyond incidental) with B all have the same result when B moves into A's path after A leaves feet - Block on B. However, A did not collide with B in crew's case, just the ball in A's hands. No foul in my book, regardless of whether or not A might have landed where B was if the ball hadn't contacted B. That is all I was saying. |
|
|||
![]()
I would be great if we could have some streamed in videos....like YOU MAKE THE CALL.....then there is no assuming or reading into......because I assume when you try to picture what actually happened....just like opinions we all picture it a little different.
I hope basketball season gets here soon!!! AK ref SE [Edited by AK ref SE on Aug 19th, 2002 at 04:21 PM] |
![]() |
Bookmarks |
|
|