Almost dunk

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by hoopguy

Disagree on the BI call. I got nuthin, play on.

Rule 4-6 Exception - Dunking or Stuffing is legal and is not Basket Interference.

The ball needs to go through the net to be a basket so no basket and no BI play on. Treat it as a missed dunk which is all it is.

Try citing the complete exception. The EXCEPTION says "In Arts. 1 or 2, if a player has his/her hand legally in contact with the ball, it is not a violation if such contact with the ball continues after it enters the basket cylinder or if in such action, the player touches the basket. Dunking or stuffing is legal and is not basket interference." The act of "dunking" ended when the player's hand(s) lost contact with the ball. And at that time the EXCEPTION ends also. And after the EXCEPTION ends, rule 4-6-1 which says that it's BI for anyone to touch the ball while the ball is on or within the basket is back in effect.

Taking one part of the EXCEPTION out of context changes the meaning of the EXCEPTION. When the ball inside the net hit the player's head, the player's hand(s) were NOT in contact with the ball. And that's why the EXCEPTION doesn't apply at that time. And that's why your theorem is wrong.

[hoopguy]

It is all part of the one single act of dunking. His head just happens to be in the wrong place, directly where the ball is going in the net. My opinion is that it is all part of the same act of dunking. How can the exception end when the players hands lose contact with the ball? The exceptions whole purpose is to say there is an exception while dunking to not be in violation of BI rules after the hands release the dunk. Just picture 99% of dunks the ball is released and then the dunker is hanging on the rim or at lease his hands are still on the rim AFTER the release of the ball.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by hoopguy

It is all part of the one single act of dunking. His head just happens to be in the wrong place, directly where the ball is going in the net. My opinion is that it is all part of the same act of dunking. How can the exception end when the players hands lose contact with the ball? The exceptions whole purpose is to say there is an exception while dunking to not be in violation of BI rules after the hands release the dunk. Just picture 99% of dunks the ball is released and then the dunker is hanging on the rim or at lease his hands are still on the rim AFTER the release of the ball.

I seem to recall some case play or interp where the player carries the ball into the cylinder (legal so far), then loses contact with the ball (still legal), then recontacts the ball with the hands (now it's illegal). I'd say the same thing happens if the subsequent contact is with the head.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

I seem to recall some case play or interp where the player carries the ball into the cylinder (legal so far), then loses contact with the ball (still legal), then recontacts the ball with the hands (now it's illegal). I'd say the same thing happens if the subsequent contact is with the head.

Yup. There is such a case player (but I'm not spending the time to look it up).

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by hoopguy

It is all part of the one single act of dunking. His head just happens to be in the wrong place, directly where the ball is going in the net. My opinion is that it is all part of the same act of dunking. How can the exception end when the players hands lose contact with the ball? The exceptions whole purpose is to say there is an exception while dunking to not be in violation of BI rules after the hands release the dunk. Just picture 99% of dunks the ball is released and then the dunker is hanging on the rim or at lease his hands are still on the rim AFTER the release of the ball.

If it's all part of the same act of dunking, then the following scenario would be legal---->A1 dunks the ball; the ball spins back up without going completely through and is circling the ring or is still in the cylinder; A1 jumps again and tips the ball in.

Or the player is hanging on the rim when the ball spins back up and he then taps it back in while hanging there?

You're really trying to say that plays like that are legal?

Sorry, hoopguy. You're mis-interpreting the rule. You're refusing to believe the existence of the first sentence of the EXCEPTION that you're trying to use.