Help with a rule.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

jar, let me ask this:
A1 tries to make a pass, but B1 gets his hand on the ball. A1's hand slips off, leaving B1 with the ball. The force being applied leads B1 to keep pushing against the ball, which is now pinned against A1's hip, knocking A1 to the floor.

PC foul?

I don't see it as a foul at all. Sounds like contact incidental to a legitimate play on the ball.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by just another ref

I don't see it as a foul at all. Sounds like contact incidental to a legitimate play on the ball.

I happen to agree, but I'm not quite at my point yet.

Yet, what if B1 had slipped off the ball and pushed A1 to the floor due to the force and momentum from his play on the ball?

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

What if B1 had slipped off the ball and pushed A1 to the floor due to the force and momentum from his play on the ball?

Show me the videotape. Then I'll rule.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Show me the videotape. Then I'll rule.

We're talking concepts here, Billy, there is no available tape.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

We're talking concepts here, Billy, there is no available tape.

Certainly an odd play, but in tens of thousands of games played each year, there has to be some tape. Everybody has a video camera these days, even if it's in a cell phone.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

I happen to agree, but I'm not quite at my point yet.

Yet, what if B1 had slipped off the ball and pushed A1 to the floor due to the force and momentum from his play on the ball?

I see your point, but I see this whole situation as totally different. If A1 originally has the ball, and B1 makes any play contacting only the ball, and in the process spikes A1 to the floor, I don't see a foul. If A1 has the ball, and uses it to deliberately contact the opponent, I see the ball as an extension of the hands and the result of the contact should be treated as such.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by just another ref

I see your point, but I see this whole situation as totally different. If A1 originally has the ball, and B1 makes any play contacting only the ball, and in the process spikes A1 to the floor, I don't see a foul. If A1 has the ball, and uses it to deliberately contact the opponent, I see the ball as an extension of the hands and the result of the contact should be treated as such.

The ball is not an extension of the hands, and quoting a rule that describes what's "incidental" (10-6-2) doesn't change that. The case play says it's a T (or nothing) when the ball is thrown at an opponent; and there's nothing in the rules, anywhere, that differentiates between a thrown ball and a held ball as far as this play is concerned.

My point is, if intentionally shoving an opponent with the ball is an intentional foul, then accidentally doing it should be a regular foul.

A1 has the ball, guarded by B1. He pivots to pass, and in the process swings the ball around and hits (with the ball only) B1 in the shoulder, knocking him to the floor (A1 is sufficiently larger than B1 that this is not an unlikely scenario). B1 was entitled to his spot, and contact was purely accidental. If B1 had been hit with A1's forearm, it would be an easy PC foul.

Are you calling this PC?

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

A1 has the ball, guarded by B1. He pivots to pass, and in the process swings the ball around and hits (with the ball only) B1 in the shoulder, knocking him to the floor (A1 is sufficiently larger than B1 that this is not an unlikely scenario). B1 was entitled to his spot, and contact was purely accidental. If B1 had been hit with A1's forearm, it would be an easy PC foul.

Are you calling this PC?

I don't see why not.

[Adam]

Well then, our disagreement is fundamental.

[Camron Rust]

While I don't have it at my disposal, I do seem to remember an interpretation that supports JAR's point.