Lakers Game..What is Da Call??

[Mark Padgett]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Was Chris Paul standing in the Laker's FC when he tapped it?

Just to answer your question - no.

[APG]

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett

Just to answer your question - no.

Like I mentioned earlier, it wouldn't have mattered if he was or not. When Chris Paul knocked the ball away, player control was lost thus the ball would have to break the plane of the midcourt line to be considered in the frontcourt. This is different than the NFHS and NCAA rule.

[The_Rookie]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

Like I mentioned earlier, it wouldn't have mattered if he was or not. When Chris Paul knocked the ball away, player control was lost thus the ball would have to break the plane of the midcourt line to be considered in the frontcourt. This is different than the NFHS and NCAA rule.

Lets Focus on NFHS rule application on this play:

1) Does Paul tipping the ball away from Kobe effect the 10 second count?

2) If Paul would have tipped it away while in frontcourt and Kobe recovered in backcourt..any problem?

Thanks!

[APG]

Originally Posted by The_Rookie

Lets Focus on NFHS rule application on this play:

1) Does Paul tipping the ball away from Kobe effect the 10 second count?

2) If Paul would have tipped it away while in frontcourt and Kobe recovered in backcourt..any problem?

Thanks!

Per NFHS:

1) If Paul is in the backcourt and deflects the ball away, it doesn't affect the 10 second count. The rule says a team can not be in continuous control of the ball for 10 seconds. Team control does not end when the defense deflects the ball.

2. If Paul deflected the ball while in the frontcourt, and Kobe allowed the ball to hit in the backcourt, there would be a new 10 second count. The ball gained frontcourt status when Paul touched it while in the frontcourt. Now we may have some issues with backcourt violations (per a stupid interpretation from NFHS) but for the matter of a new count, yes there would be a new count as soon as the ball gained backcourt status.

[BillyMac]

NFHS: What if Paul deflected the ball while in the frontcourt, and the ball while airborne, never touching floor in the backcourt, was caught by Bryant, while he was standing in the backcourt?

[APG]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

NFHS: What if Paul deflected the ball while in the frontcourt, and the ball while airborne, never touching floor in the backcourt, was caught by Bryant, while he was standing in the backcourt?

This is in reference to the stupid interpretation that NFHS has laid out that I mentioned in my post.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

This is in reference to the stupid interpretation that NFHS has laid out that I mentioned in my post.

Interestingly, I would be willing to bet the same people that wrote that interp would rule this play legal. Whether they'd recognize the discrepancy or not, I don't know.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

NFHS: What if Paul deflected the ball while in the frontcourt, and the ball while airborne, never touching floor in the backcourt, was caught by Bryant, while he was standing in the backcourt?

Why are you asking? You know the interp and APG already referenced it in the post right above yours.

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

Per NFHS:
...
2. If Paul deflected the ball while in the frontcourt, and Kobe allowed the ball to hit in the backcourt, there would be a new 10 second count. The ball gained frontcourt status when Paul touched it while in the frontcourt. Now we may have some issues with backcourt violations (per a stupid interpretation from NFHS) but for the matter of a new count, yes there would be a new count as soon as the ball gained backcourt status.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

APG already referenced it in the post right above yours.

Sorry. I only skim through threads that deal with the NBA.