Quote:
Originally posted by Damian
I am trying to have somewhat of an intellectual discussion here. ASSUME for a minute that what I have requested and what FBullock confirms is that you must have both feet INBOUNDS to obtain a legal guarding position. Leave the rest of the c__p about the rules committee and medication out and lets talk about how this will impact our decision on a block/charge ruling.
Come on guys.
|
Damian -- he always acts like this. If you ignore him, maybe he'll go away -- although that hasn't worked yet.
About the rule, I think if they meant that both feet had to be entirely inbounds, they should have said so. It's very unclear, don't you think? When anyone sees the new book, look up 4-23-2 and see if the wording is clear, or confusing. The note on the NFHS website isn't very helpful.
Wed Jul 23, 2003, 01:09am
Hybrid Mode
