Rules questions...

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Why would you think that?

He said that the ball hit the "underneath portion" of the backboard, not the back of the backboard. The bottom of the backboard is in play. And....if the ball "bounces directly to the floor" either straight down or forward, that's perfectly legal also.

Legal play imo from the original description...unless he lied to us.

Basic physics. He may have said it hit the underneath portion but his description of the action doesn't fit that conclusion.

The only way for the ball to loose all of its forward momentum and go straight down is from some contact with the back of the board. Contact with only the bottom surface of the board would have only changed the up/down component of the balls movement and the ball would have proceeded beyond the backboard.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Basic physics. He may have said it hit the underneath portion but his description of the action doesn't fit that conclusion.

The only way for the ball to loose all of its forward momentum and go straight down is from some contact with the back of the board. Contact with only the bottom surface of the board would have only changed the up/down component of the balls movement and the ball would have proceeded beyond the backboard.

I guess that the NFHS rulesmakers don't understand basic physics then. Years ago they issued a ruling on this that said that a end-line throw-in that hit the board and went straight down or forward was OK, but one that bounced backward towards the endline had to be a violation.

Stoopid NFHS rulesmaker monkeys.

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

I guess that the NFHS rulesmakers don't understand basic physics then. Years ago they issued a ruling on this that said that a end-line throw-in that hit the board and went straight down or forward was OK, but one that bounced backward towards the endline had to be a violation.

Stoopid NFHS rulesmaker monkeys.

Correct. Backboards have rounded padding. The ball can easily hit the padding without hitting the back of the backboard and go directly down. If the ball hits the back, it's not going straight down. It's going backwards.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

I guess that the NFHS rulesmakers don't understand basic physics then. Years ago they issued a ruling on this that said that a end-line throw-in that hit the board and went straight down or forward was OK, but one that bounced backward towards the endline had to be a violation.

Stoopid NFHS rulesmaker monkeys.

I guess they don't. There is no way it can stop moving forward without somthing pushing it back...and the only thing that can do that is something facing back.

And it is only logical that the back facing part of any padding would be an extension of the back of the board itself.

That wouldn't be the first or last time someone issued a ruling void if any intelligence.