The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #16 (permalink)  
Old Mon Mar 03, 2003, 07:19pm
In Memoriam
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Houghton, U.P., Michigan
Posts: 9,953
Wink For your sake I wish there was.

Quote:
Originally posted by ChuckElias
Quote:
Originally posted by mick
Uh, ...cuz there is no rule against it?
...And it doesn't bother me.
But it exactly fits the two criteria that you mentioned in the previous post. The defender is not playing the ball, and is merely being aggravating. So why is there a rule in one case and not in the other? That's my only point.

Chuck
Chuck,
Maybe that action is not very wide spread.
But I think that if you deem the act to be unsporting, then you should call it unsporting in your games.
The rules allow us lots of room to make such judgments.

Go for it. What's the worst that could happen, that they stop the yelling and the coach has to sit?
mick


Reply With Quote
  #17 (permalink)  
Old Mon Mar 03, 2003, 07:50pm
In Memoriam
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Hell
Posts: 20,211
Quote:
Originally posted by ChuckElias
Quote:
Originally posted by mick
Uh, ...cuz there is no rule against it?
...And it doesn't bother me.
But it exactly fits the two criteria that you mentioned in the previous post. The defender is not playing the ball, and is merely being aggravating. So why is there a rule in one case and not in the other? That's my only point.
I think that CB play 10.3.8SitA gives you an idea about their thinking.

OK,and legal,to try and divert a player's attention.
Not OK(and unsporting) to obstruct their vision.
Reply With Quote
  #18 (permalink)  
Old Mon Mar 03, 2003, 10:29pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 9,466
Send a message via AIM to rainmaker
Quote:
Originally posted by ChuckElias
Quote:
Originally posted by mick
Uh, ...cuz there is no rule against it?
...And it doesn't bother me.
But it exactly fits the two criteria that you mentioned in the previous post. The defender is not playing the ball, and is merely being aggravating. So why is there a rule in one case and not in the other? That's my only point.

Chuck
..uh..safety? Is the other situation unsafe?
Reply With Quote
  #19 (permalink)  
Old Tue Mar 04, 2003, 07:43am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 14,995
Quote:
Originally posted by Jurassic Referee
I think that CB play 10.3.8SitA gives you an idea about their thinking.

OK,and legal,to try and divert a player's attention.
Not OK(and unsporting) to obstruct their vision.
JR,
After reading both the rulesbook and the casebook, I'm still unclear if this thinking also applies to a player with the ball.
Reply With Quote
  #20 (permalink)  
Old Tue Mar 04, 2003, 08:06am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Western Mass.
Posts: 9,105
Send a message via AIM to ChuckElias
Quote:
Originally posted by rainmaker
..uh..safety? Is the other situation unsafe?
Possibly, although that wouldn't have been my first thought. I was merely commenting that yelling fit the description that was given for waving of the hands. If "safety" is added as the real reason for the rule, then I'd have to concede that yelling is probably not a safety issue. It still bugs me tho.

Chuck
__________________
Any NCAA rules and interpretations in this post are relevant for men's games only!
Reply With Quote
  #21 (permalink)  
Old Tue Mar 04, 2003, 09:00am
We don't rent pigs
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 7,627
After reading this thread, I see potential for a valuable supplement to all rule books.

"THINGS THAT DO AND DON'T BOTHER MICK!"


__________________
I swear, Gus, you'd argue with a possum.
It'd be easier than arguing with you, Woodrow.


Lonesome Dove
Reply With Quote
  #22 (permalink)  
Old Tue Mar 04, 2003, 09:43am
In Memoriam
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Hell
Posts: 20,211
Quote:
Originally posted by Nevadaref
Quote:
Originally posted by Jurassic Referee
I think that CB play 10.3.8SitA gives you an idea about their thinking.

OK,and legal,to try and divert a player's attention.
Not OK(and unsporting) to obstruct their vision.
JR,
After reading both the rulesbook and the casebook, I'm still unclear if this thinking also applies to a player with the ball.
Nevada,I think that it must.Rule 10-3-8d specifically refers to it applying only to an "opponent not in control of the ball". The casebook question asks if it is an unsporting act to do it to a player with the ball.The answer is "no",followed by the explanation.

I don't think that they would ever use the language that they did if there was a situation where they wanted a T called for a defender waving their hands in the face of someone who had the ball.
Reply With Quote
  #23 (permalink)  
Old Tue Mar 04, 2003, 09:49am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 152
Chuck-

Here's my theory -- and I'm guessimg -- on why this rule was put in. Imagine defending the post from behind by pputting hand in front of the eyes. This would be a rather effective strategy, if legal, as the whole point of posting up is to set up in a position and NOT move away from the defender. It would also lead to a lot of pushing and aggravation that has nothing to with the game. My guess is that is why the rule came into effect, as it is difficult to effectively put a hand to block the vision of a non-ballhandler outside of the post.
Reply With Quote
  #24 (permalink)  
Old Thu Mar 06, 2003, 08:07am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 14,995
JR and others,
I am pressing this a bit because of a situation that I had last year.

Here's the play: The offensive player stops her dribble at the free throw line. She turns her back to the defender and is looking to pass to a teammate. The defender is now standing behind the offensive player, who is holding the ball. The defender reaches around the offensive player's head with both arms in a bear hug motion and covers the eyes of the offensive player by overlapping her hands maybe an inch in front of her face. No contact is made at all, and no attempt is made to play the ball.
Is this legal or is it a T?
Reply With Quote
  #25 (permalink)  
Old Thu Mar 06, 2003, 08:22am
In Memoriam
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Houghton, U.P., Michigan
Posts: 9,953
Quote:
Originally posted by Nevadaref
JR and others,
I am pressing this a bit because of a situation that I had last year.

Here's the play: The offensive player stops her dribble at the free throw line. She turns her back to the defender and is looking to pass to a teammate. The defender is now standing behind the offensive player, who is holding the ball. The defender reaches around the offensive player's head with both arms in a bear hug motion and covers the eyes of the offensive player by overlapping her hands maybe an inch in front of her face. No contact is made at all, and no attempt is made to play the ball.
Is this legal or is it a T?
Nevadaref,
If offense pivots and gets hit by the hands or arms, you are ready to make that call.
This is not a rules problem; it's a coaching problem.
mick
Reply With Quote
  #26 (permalink)  
Old Thu Mar 06, 2003, 09:23am
In Memoriam
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Hell
Posts: 20,211
Agree with mick.There's gonna be a touch (personal)foul called in a hurry on this one.I guess you could call a T under the "includes,but not limited to" part of the definition if you really wanted to call it an "unsporting act",but the described act is not one of the examples listed in the rulebook.If the hands are that close to the face,there pretty well has to be some slight contact somewhere that you can quickly call a personal on.That should get the idea across(along with a few well chosen words,maybe).
Reply With Quote
  #27 (permalink)  
Old Thu Mar 06, 2003, 10:29am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 521
Quote:
Originally posted by Jurassic Referee
Agree with mick.There's gonna be a touch (personal)foul called in a hurry on this one.I guess you could call a T under the "includes,but not limited to" part of the definition if you really wanted to call it an "unsporting act",but the described act is not one of the examples listed in the rulebook.If the hands are that close to the face,there pretty well has to be some slight contact somewhere that you can quickly call a personal on.That should get the idea across(along with a few well chosen words,maybe).
Push or hand cneck?
Reply With Quote
  #28 (permalink)  
Old Thu Mar 06, 2003, 10:46am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 18,016
Quote:
Originally posted by RecRef
Quote:
Originally posted by Jurassic Referee
Agree with mick.There's gonna be a touch (personal)foul called in a hurry on this one.I guess you could call a T under the "includes,but not limited to" part of the definition if you really wanted to call it an "unsporting act",but the described act is not one of the examples listed in the rulebook.If the hands are that close to the face,there pretty well has to be some slight contact somewhere that you can quickly call a personal on.That should get the idea across(along with a few well chosen words,maybe).
Push or hand cneck?
Hand check is (generally) only used for a dribbler.

Push (if offense is displaced) or hold (if offense is prevented from moving -- more likely in this instance, imho).
Reply With Quote
  #29 (permalink)  
Old Thu Mar 06, 2003, 10:47am
In Memoriam
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Hell
Posts: 20,211
Quote:
Originally posted by RecRef
Quote:
Originally posted by Jurassic Referee
Agree with mick.There's gonna be a touch (personal)foul called in a hurry on this one.I guess you could call a T under the "includes,but not limited to" part of the definition if you really wanted to call it an "unsporting act",but the described act is not one of the examples listed in the rulebook.If the hands are that close to the face,there pretty well has to be some slight contact somewhere that you can quickly call a personal on.That should get the idea across(along with a few well chosen words,maybe).
Push or hand cneck?
Probably "hold" or "illegal use of hands".
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:06pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1