![]() |
Quote:
Reading the rule, I don't know how you could award anything else. |
Quote:
Many (perhaps most) feel the "thrown ball" rule is written with the assumption that the ball is thrown toward the area of the basket....and that a deflection that redirects the ball to the basket is no longer a "thrown ball"....particularly a deflection on a ball that is not going above the rim or is on its way down. The purpose of this rule is NOT to turn a wild deflection into 3 points but to take the judgement out of the case where a ball, as released, may or may not have been a try but goes directly into the basket....and that a brush (not a redirection) by a defender doesn't change the status of the thrown ball. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
I agree the rule was written to take the judgement out. Taking the position above is adding a lot of judgement back in. IMO, 5-2-1 and 5.2.1C(b) in the case book gives us only one choice. Count it as 3. |
Quote:
There is another case play (someone else can look it up) that has a thrown ball (try) that bounces off a defender's head and into the basket. The ball was thrown from behind the 3-point arc. The ruling in that case play is that it counts for 2 points. Why? At the point in time where the "try" is over (certain it will not be successful, below the rim, hits the floor, etc.) the thrown ball can no longer score for 3 points....any subsequent deflection is a NEW action. So, a thrown ball that can not possibly go in as released is not subject to being 3-points. The judgement removed is in the intent of the thrower, not whether the "try" has ended or not. The former requires the reading of a mind. The latter only requires the observation of physical facts. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
2 points |
I get what you guys are saying and it makes sense to me logically but it definitely doesn't jive with the rule (not the first time for sure). I'll look for that Case Play that Camron references. If one of you comes across it, please post it here.
|
Quote:
A1's three-point try is short and bleow ring level when it hits the shoulder of: (a)A2; or (b)B1 and rebounds to the backboard and through the basket. Ruling: the three-point try ended when it was obviously short and below the ring. However, since a live ball went through the basket, two points are scored in both (a) and (b). (5-1) |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
This case play showed up somewhere between 03-04 and 07-08. 5.2.1C was in the books in 2003. This leads me to believe the Fed wanted to make a point as described by Snaqs/Camron and anyone else who supported that thought. Why else would they add it after 5.2.1C already existed? Similar to what my "chops bustin'" friend has been known to say, I guess ol' Scratch is full of shiz nit. I am re-thinking this one! |
Quote:
The case play is 4.41.4 Situation B. Rules = dashes, case plays = dots. |
Yeah, caught that right after I posted, edited shortly after <_<
|
Quote:
On the 2nd one, it never hits A2's hands. |
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:54pm. |