Very well, then.
http://www.byrnerobotics.com/forum/u...Dead_Horse.jpg

Ok then.

http://thetact.files.wordpress.com/2...in-holland.jpg

(Of course, I'm not sure which one us this applies to.)

I almost went that route, but we're not talking about the arrow. :D

Wait is somebody getting rid of the arrow? :eek:

Nope, different arrow discussion.

Ah must have missed that one. Is it in relation to violations during an AP throw in?

Since M&M has already posted the picture, I may as well....

It's my belief that the rule should be changed so that the arrow is switched as soon as the ball is at the disposal of the thrower. I am alone in this belief, though, so I don't expect it will ever get changed.

Got it.

I say get rid of the arrow.

A little more chum in the water ought to do it...

ok, I'm jumping back in...please shoot me!
 

FWIW, NCAA rules do not include the equivalent of 4-23-4 and 4-23-5, so there is no real distinction between guarding dribblers and airborne players, and a defender can legally move laterally or obliquely after LGP was established. This follows everyone's impression that it should also apply here. But since the rules are written differently, we cannot automatically assume the same principles apply.

I've been reading but not responding the last few days trying to make the room stop spinning. I guess the horse is still kicking! The glue factory will have to wait.

You hit the nail on the head. I think this IS where the two sides have been divided. :rolleyes:
You and your supporters are reading the movement by B in regards to an airborne shooter is NOT legal PERIOD!
The others, which I agree with, say that the wording of moving pertains to B moving into a spot like an undercutting.
The NCAA wording you mentioned is more along the lines that I have been thinking. i.e. how could they be allowing an airborne shooter to "fly into" a player backing up and yet not allow a dribbler (or any player for that matter) run over, into or through a defender who is moving backwards?
BTW, I've sent an email to IAABO to see if Mr Webb, etal can shed some light on this. I thought about calling board's interpreter, but I didn't think that would carrier enough weight since we are talking about the written words in the rules book.

Blarges? :D

I'm with you brother! Great example. This seems crystal clear to me. I was originally shocked when we had others say it would be a block!!!:confused::rolleyes:
Forget even a player with the ball! Would we let ANY player jump in the air and then land on the back of the slower moving player in front of them? I would hope not.
I do understand their point of view better now, but I know both sides are reading it differently.

Art - appreciate your understanding of the position, and your attempt to get another opinion. My only comment would be that while Mr. Webb may very well have an excellent understanding of the rules, it would still be just another opinion. I wouldn't consider him the final authority on the matter (even if he agrees with me :D), because it's the NFHS rules we're dealing with. I will accept something from an NFHS rules committee menmber.

Just FYI, one of the people that agrees with my position is also a respected IAABO rules interpreter. Again, that doesn't make it correct, just that the opinion carries a little more weight.