Subs with multiple fouls

[Scratch85]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

What rules?

Are you really saying that 3-3-1(c) and 3-3-1(d) should both be used on the same situation? You'd apply 2 different rules to one situation?

Shudder.....

Or am I reading something wrong?

No. It is two separate situations.

The penalty for rule 10 , False Double Fouls, tells us to penalize them as two separate acts. So, why should we not administer them as two separate acts.

Just curious, do you have me marked as "ignore" on your preferences? Or are you just thinking about marking me as "ignore"? Honestly, I don't mind getting my chops busted. I usually learn something just after it happens!

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

It's not in the rule. It's in the case play.

Are you really saying a player either laying flat or sitting can't roll to the side while making a pass?

We disagree. Shrug.

If they roll all the way onto their side with the ball, no, that is "rolling over" and the case play supports that interpretation by excluding that action from the list of permissible actions.

If they rock towards the side in the motion of passing the ball....no violation.

Sort of like a standing player taking a step forward with their pivot foot that would be a travel if had they not just released the ball before the foot came back down.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Scratch85

No. It is two separate situations.

The penalty for rule 10 , False Double Fouls, tells us to penalize them as two separate acts. So, why should we not administer them as two separate acts.

Just curious, do you have me marked as "ignore" on your preferences? Or are you just thinking about marking me as "ignore"? Honestly, I don't mind getting my chops busted. I usually learn something just after it happens!

Yup, and we do penalize them as separate acts. But nowhere in any rule that I know of does it state that different substitution rules should be applied in any false double foul. You use one of the ones listed in 3-3-1, not 2.

I don't have anybody marked to "ignore" and never have as long as I've posted here, Scratch. If I disagree with somebody, the kinder, gentler JR will just politely tell them so. And verse-visa.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

If they roll all the way onto their side with the ball, no, that is "rolling over" and the case play supports that interpretation by excluding that action from the list of permissible actions.

And there's where we disagree. I say that it is a roll but it is not a roll over. And I also say the case play supports that with it's usage of the word "over".

Who's right?

We can argue forever but until we get a definitive interpretation from the FED, who knows? Until then we're just going around in circles.

JMO....obviously.

[Scratch85]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Yup, and we do penalize them as separate acts. But nowhere in any rule that I know of does it state that different substitution rules should be applied in any false double foul. You use one of the ones listed in 3-3-1, not 2.

Why use one when you have two separate acts. Apply the substitution rules that apply to each act. It just makes sense to me. But my senses have been questioned many times before.

I don't have anybody marked to "ignore" and never have as long as I've posted here, Scratch. If I disagree with somebody, the kinder, gentler JR will just politely tell them so. And verse-visa.

Believe me I know. I hate to do the "agree to disagree" thing, but I am not sure how much longer I can discuss this irrelevant (as JRut calls it) issue. Merry Christmas to all who are reading and I wish all of you best of times to come.

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

And there's where we disagree. I say that it is a roll but it is not a roll over.

Makes no difference.

The point is the case play tells us what is legally allowed and "roll" is NOT listed. Pass, shoot, dribble, call timeout or sit up. Those are the ONLY legal actions listed. I don't see how you can disagree with that when it's printed in black and white. :shrug:

But I'll leave you along now. Have yourself a Merry Little Christmas!

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

I'm so glad you offered your opinion on an irrelevant issue. Thanks.

The point is it does not matter what you do. It does not matter in the end when they come in and that is why the issue is irrelevant. Worrying about it is not going to change the result. Actually I doubt most people would even care either way when evaluating you. So why sit up night and worry about it? I guess some people have to worry about something.

Peace

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Welpe

I think Scratch is right on the money. I also don't think there's a big deal in going with A either.

Rut, you need some Christmas cheer.

Dude I am fine. I think some of you need to stop worrying about things that no one is going to call you on or care that much about. I have honestly never had a single person ever bring this up or try to challenge this issue on any level until I am reading this here. Which is why I said what you do is not that important. I think some of you need to get the stick out of your behinds and worry about the things that are going to really get you in trouble. This is not something that will either way.

Peace

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

So why sit up night and worry about it? I guess some people have to worry about something.

Why are you sitting up all night worrying about other people sitting up all night worrying about something? Is it because some people have to worry about something?

And why am I worrying about you worrying about some people worrying about something?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

Makes no difference.

Does too!

But don't sit up all night worrying about it. Or sit up all night worrying about me worrying about it. Or......

[BktBallRef]

I was in bed by 10:30 pm.

And I wasn't up at 6:30 am posting either...only old people do that!

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

I was in bed by 10:30 pm.

And I wasn't up at 6:30 am posting either...only old people do that!

Maybe he was posting from his phone while waiting for his lunch to be served at Denny's.

Jeff, I'm certainly not up worrying about this. I personally find these esoteric discussions useful but maybe that's just me.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Welpe

Maybe he was posting from his phone while waiting for his lunch to be served at Denny's.

Jeff, I'm certainly not up worrying about this. I personally find these esoteric discussions useful but maybe that's just me.

Stop taking what I said so personal. You can discuss anything as many ways as you want. But no one outside of this board is really going to care or notice as long as the subs are in the game before the ball can be put back into play. And during a T players can come in the game to shoot, so this might be a moot point anyway. But hey, discuss away. And when someone makes a big deal out of this either way, let us all know so we can mark the first time that happens.

Peace

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Stop taking what I said so personal.

Peace

I'm not...but ok.

I fully acknowledge very few people if anybody will care about this.

Merry Christmas everyone.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

The point is it does not matter what you do. It does not matter in the end when they come in and that is why the issue is irrelevant. Worrying about it is not going to change the result. Actually I doubt most people would even care either way when evaluating you. So why sit up night and worry about it? I guess some people have to worry about something.

Peace

I think it's an interesting exercise in rule study; but I didn't lose any sleep over it.