"Poor application of the rules"
 

PIAA's backcourt question got me to thinking.

Folks here have given ample evidence as to why the sitch he posed was a backcourt violation. And yet, even when you provide solid reasoning for such a ruling, you can still hear, "that's a poor application of the rules." (It didn't happen on that thread, but it's not an uncommon objection.)

Is this comment simply a fallback when people have no viable argument, or do you find there are rulings that are technically sound, but are indeed a "poor application?"

Never heard it, but it sounds the same as other similarly ambiguous terms such as "game management" or "spirit of the rules." Terms that actually have a solid foundation but are overused and abused.

if anybody ever says that to you, simply respond: "actually...it's the CORRECT application of the rules...sounds to me like you simply don't like the rule."

their argument isn't w/ you...it's with the rule book...

if they persist, ask them: "which of the other rules should we ignore in tonight's game? how about no 3pt shots or no traveling?":)

FWIW, the games I did last night (8th grade girls) were on a court that had no three point line, so we couldn't give three point baskets to the girl who made 2 shots from beyond the top of the key.

Does The Division Line Count ???
 

Feel sorry for the kid, whose team is down by three, with seconds to go in the game, who shoots a three-quarter court shot, horn sounds when the shot is in the air, nothing but net. Another loss, get on the bus, let's go home.