Hanging on the Rim
 

A1 dunks on a breakaway. Momentum causes his body legs fly out ahead of him while dunking. No defender right under him. Do we allow him to hang on the rim to get his balance?

T was called in the Kentucky game.

It depends
 

NCAA and NFHS both say a player can grasp the ring to prevent injury. It doesn't matter in either code whether another player is around. It's all up to the judgment of the official.

Saw the play, thought it was a poor call

Agreed.

Yes.

I saw the recap on TSN and I would have passed.

Dunkin Donuts ...
 

Did it ever matter? About twenty-five years ago, didn't the NFHS exception have something to do with a player underneath the dunker? I'm sure that Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. will be moseying along shortly to confirm, or deny, my statement. He probably taking his midmorning nap about now.

Does that matter now?

Those Who Don't Know History Are Destined To Repeat It (Edmund Burke) ...
 

Yes it does. It would explain the confusion about the myth that there must be a player under the dunker to allow the dunker to grasp the rim.

Perhaps...or maybe it would just confuse the issue even more.

Misty Water Colored Memories ...
 

For rookies. Yes. I agree. For veterans. Let's debunk the myth.

It looks like Spence needed a little help on this. I'm sure that others may need a little myth debunking as well. I know that I will sometimes need some help with these changes that create such myths.

Good grief.

Add it to your book.

Who said there was a myth? Spence saw a play and asked if others thought the T was appropriate. It's a judgment call.

Sometimes it's your replies that cause the confusion b/c you start bringing up rulings from the 80's.

Rule Changes Can Be A Bit*h ...
 

Spence included, "No defender right under him", in his post. Either Spence is a veteran, or he has talked to veterans about this situation. The defender being under the "rim grasper" used to be relevant to the interpretation. It is no longer relevant to the situation, and the interpretation.

Or maybe he was just describing the play.

I stand by my previous reading comprehension comment.