Rsbq

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

I am puzzled by how many people think it is okay to bail out V2 for making illegal contact with H1 when the illegal contact is the result of V2 playing out of control.

Once again, the key is H1 was prevented from standing upright within his Cylinder of Verticality by V2's illegal contact. We do not have to have H1 attempt to stand upright, V2's contact prevented H1 from standing upright.

MTD, Sr.

The OP makes absolutely no mention of whether A1 attempted to stand up straight or not...if he made no effort to straighten up, then B1 did not prevent him from standing upright within his "Cylinder of Verticality".

You are making assumptions not backed by the OP.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

The OP makes absolutely no mention of whether A1 attempted to stand up straight or not...if he made no effort to straighten up, then B1 did not prevent him from standing upright within his "Cylinder of Verticality".

You are making assumptions not backed by the OP.

It does not matter whether or not H1 attemtped to stand upright within his CV, V2's contact prevented him from doing so.

MTD, Sr.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

It does not matter whether or not H1 attemtped to stand upright within his CV, H2's contact prevented him from doing so.

MTD, Sr.

So what? Was the player put at a disadvantage?

Sounds like he didn't travel and it didn't stop him from continuing play, so I'm inclined to let it go unless the contact is severe.

Or as my friend would say: "Game interrupter."

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

It does not matter whether or not H1 attemtped to stand upright within his CV, H2's contact prevented him from doing so.

MTD, Sr.

I disagree, B1 can't prevent an opponent from doing something he isn't attempting to do. Nothing you can do or say right now is going to prevent me from going to Ohio this weekend; because I'm not trying.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Nothing you can do or say right now is going to prevent me from going to Ohio this weekend; because I'm not trying.

That's not quite the concept of prevention: otherwise, it would be impossible to prevent measles in someone who wasn't trying to catch it.

The concept you want here is not prevention but obstruction or hindrance, which does require an effort and an opposition.

And anyway, you might not be trying to go to Ohio this weekend, but you know you want to!

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by mbyron

That's not quite the concept of prevention: otherwise, it would be impossible to prevent measles in someone who wasn't trying to catch it.

The concept you want here is not prevention but obstruction or hindrance, which does require an effort and an opposition.

And anyway, you might not be trying to go to Ohio this weekend, but you know you want to!

You sound like Sheldon Cooper, Ph.D.

MTD, Sr.

[Art N]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

You sound like Sheldon Cooper, Ph.D.

MTD, Sr.

That is perfect! (just like Sheldon Cooper!)

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

H1 bent over to pick up a loose ball. I willing to bet dollars to donuts that the first thing he would do is stand upright. I seriously doubt he would hike the ball through his legs to a teammate (even though I did see this happen in a girls' game once, ). The point is that V2 violated H1's CV and made contact with H1 that prevented him from standing upright.


A better example would be this play:

A1 dives for a loose ball and gains control of the ball while laying prone on his stomach on the floor. From this postion A1 can roll (this would be considered a pass by rule) to A2 who is standing a few feet in frong of him. B1 who was trying to out race A1 to the ball lands on top of A1 but this contact does not prevent A1 from rolling the ball to A2, which he does almost immediately after B1 lands on A1. Foul on B1 or not?

MTD, Sr.

P.S. I have to get ready for a game with Mark, Jr., tonight. Have a good evening guys and gals.

[tref]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Art N:

Yes, but it is not a foul in the Act of Shooting. It is a Common Foul.

MTD, Sr.

The ol' "nice move kid & great head fake as well, now take it out & try it again" call?

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

A better example would be this play:

A1 dives for a loose ball and gains control of the ball while laying prone on his stomach on the floor. From this postion A1 can roll (this would be considered a pass by rule) to A2 who is standing a few feet in frong of him. B1 who was trying to out race A1 to the ball lands on top of A1 but this contact does not prevent A1 from rolling the ball to A2, which he does almost immediately after B1 lands on A1. Foul on B1 or not?

MTD, Sr.

P.S. I have to get ready for a game with Mark, Jr., tonight. Have a good evening guys and gals.

Well, seeing how B1 landed ON top of A1 I have a foul. This play is much different than 2 hands in the back of A1. Sometimes the contact is so egregious that we cant overlook it.

Have a great game tonight!!

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

I disagree, B1 can't prevent an opponent from doing something he isn't attempting to do. Nothing you can do or say right now is going to prevent me from going to Ohio this weekend; because I'm not trying.

Snaqs:

Why would you want to come to Ohio this weekend. It is cold and dreary. I should think that you would prefer a place like Hawaii or the U.S. Virgin Islands.

MTD, Sr.

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

It does not matter whether or not H1 attemtped to stand upright within his CV, H2's contact prevented him from doing so.

MTD, Sr.

How can one be "prevented" from doing something that one isn't even trying to do??? That makes no sense and is a ridiculous statement.

[tref]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Again, maybe I'm seeing this differently than you, but if A1 isn't affected in the slightest, I don't see the point of calling a foul.

Quality, meaningful whistles... I Love It! We dont like GI Joe

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Sorry, but these are all just different ways of saying "advantage/disadvantage," which is just another way of wording 4-27-3.

Snaqs, you're exactly right, just another way of wording 4-27-3.
But the principles, if followed correctly, gives us a reference to make the correct call in different situations/areas on the court.
The guidelines are just that, guidelines.
Sometimes guidelines can be quite vague, the principles are more defined.
JMO

Originally Posted by rockyroad

...if he made no effort to straighten up, then B1 did not prevent him from standing upright within his "Cylinder of Verticality".

Sorta like the football official who calls an offensive hold, but the defender is standing right there allowing himself to be held.

Originally Posted by VaTerp

Gotcha.

I see it as the same concept applied to different situations but realize that, for whatever reason, not everybody sees it that way.

Give it another 2-5 seasons & they'll buy in! Especially once we get the RA in HS.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by tref

Especially once we get the RA in HS.

Heaven forbid....

[SNIPERBBB]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Heaven forbid....

Its hard enough to get people to call a PC foul around here. We don't need to give them another out.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by SNIPERBBB

Its hard enough to get people to call a PC foul around here. We don't need to give them another out.

I agree. It is same up here in NW Ohio.

MTD, Sr.