![]() |
Quote:
|
Quote:
And here it is 1/2 day later and still no clip. I'm disappointed. :p |
Quote:
Just channeling my inner JR! |
Quote:
But hey, its much easier to make calls from the stands/couch than in real game situations... |
Quote:
For crying out loud, Rut, I didn't say it "has" to be an int just because he was fouled from behind; I simply disagreed with your assessment that it's not relevant. Because you were wrong. I'm fully aware of what "clear path" means in the NBA, and so is tref; but I can also tell what he meant by what he wrote. That was clearer than the path itself. |
Quote:
http://forum.officiating.com/basketb...tml#post744252 |
Quote:
A1 has a fast break, around 25' from the basket B1 grabs A1 around the waist from behind. In deciding whether or not to assess an IF on B1 does it matter whether or not Team B had another defender in between A1 and the basket? Or say B1 makes a half play on the ball and fouls A1. If there is no other defender between A1 and basket are we now going to call a IF because of the clear path? |
Quote:
I'm done with it, though. |
Quote:
Quote:
Peace |
JRut, although the rulebooks at various levels are written different, many rules have the same meaning. I think the leagues rules are written best, terms like gather & clear path are clear cut & takes the judgment out of the equation.
Of course we can't apply NBA rules to an NCAA or HS contest, but doesn't clear path mean someone has an advantageous position at any level of play? The defender chasing down the AZ player raised my antennas... when they get beat, they cheat. But grabbing an airborne player at the rack was the selling point for me! |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Peace |
You're hearing what you want hear JRut. I said the clear path AZ had raised my antennas for a potential foul. I based my thoughts about the no call on the defenders action.
|
This is why we get paid the big bucks.
Quote:
Peace |
Quote:
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:04am. |