Held ball or foul?

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Pantherdreams

I'ld have a foul there.

Now if he's coming into the ball from the other side or if the player is on their back and ball is up above and the player jumps into/onto the ball and ends up landing on the player. Different story.

Yes, then you have a player control foul.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Freddy

Is this the kinda play on which some would not call a foul?

I've got a foul on the Black player, and I believe that the trail has the same call as me.

[Freddy]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

I've got a foul on the Black player, and I believe that the trail has the same call as me.

Of course, only an anal grammar nazi would dare suggest that you should have said, "...as I."
But since there is no need for rules or structure or form or orderliness in language anymore -- because, after all, the English were loose with their verbage at some point back in the 16th century -- it really doesn't matter.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Freddy

... there is no need for rules or structure or form or orderliness in language anymore ...

The English language hasn't changed since it was invented. Why should we be allowed to change it now?

To telle yow al the condicioun, Of ech of hem, so as it semed me, And whiche they weren, and of what degree, And eek in what array that they were inne, And at a knyght than wol I first bigynne.

http://comicskingdom.com/rhymes-with-orange/2014-05-15

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

The English language hasn't changed since it was invented. Why should we be allowed to change it now?

Are you sure about that? The English language is a forever changing thing and always will be. If you know someone that speaks under all the rules and does not use slang, dialect or other social media language it will be a very rare occasion. Oh and the English that spoke the language speak it differently than people in the US. And people in this country never speak it the same way or understand it the same way.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Are you sure about that?

Please don't make me whip out the blue font and use it on the general prologue to Chaucer's The Canterbury Tales.

Maybe a line from Beowulf would have been a better example:

Oft Scyld the Scefing from scathers in numbers
From many a people their mead-benches tore.

"Nothing is more discouraging than unappreciated sarcasm." (Anonymous)

[Adam]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

The English language hasn't changed since it was invented. Why should we be allowed to change it now?

To telle yow al the condicioun, Of ech of hem, so as it semed me, And whiche they weren, and of what degree, And eek in what array that they were inne, And at a knyght than wol I first bigynne.

Rhymes with Orange by Hilary Price - May 15, 2014 | Comics | Comics Kingdom - Comic Strips, Editorial Cartoons, Sunday Funnies, Jokes

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Are you sure about that? The English language is a forever changing thing and always will be. If you know someone that speaks under all the rules and does not use slang, dialect or other social media language it will be a very rare occasion. Oh and the English that spoke the language speak it differently than people in the US. And people in this country never speak it the same way or understand it the same way.

Peace

This was holy crap funny to me.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Adam

This was holy crap funny to me.

Is that a line from the second nun's tale?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Is that a line from the second nun's tale?

Was that the one with Whoopi Goldberg?

[jeremy341a]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Getting the ball first doesn't give a player the right to land on another player. Still a foul.

I agree with you yet some will say that if you block the shot first than all other contact after is not a foul.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by jeremy341a

... some will say that if you block the shot first than all other contact after is not a foul.

Note to Some: So, let's see if I've got this straight? A defender runs out to the corner to attempt to block a three point attempt. The defender legally, with no contact between the shooter, and the defender, and successfully, blocks the shot, sending the ball into the crowd (the crowd cheers) but his inertia (I love it when I get to use physics terms on the Forum) carries him into the still airborne shooter, pushing him into the third row of the bleachers, where the shooter sustains a concussion, a simple fracture of his right humerus, and a cut over his right eye that requires six stitches to close. Because the contact occurred after the shot was legally blocked, an official should rule that any subsequent contact is not a foul?

[Pantherdreams]

Originally Posted by jeremy341a

I agree with you yet some will say that if you block the shot first than all other contact after is not a foul.

That seems like a blanket statement in both cases (now that the ball is blocked or held) the contact is not gaining the players a clear and immediate advantage in terms of the result of the play. Now to determine a foul call it comes to a judgement about whether the contact is excessive or leading to rough play.

The difference becomes (IMO) that I now cannot call a foul based on the immediate adv/disadv of the play not its a a serverity of contact and if I feel its becoming or leading to rough play.

I'm not sure about the sort of games every officiates but high end boys games JV, Varsity, higher+ in this neck of the woods you getting landed on is probably the least severe amount of contact you are going to deal with on a given possession. So I am going to have to see more then a jump ball where a player ends up on top of the other to make it rough(er).

[Pantherdreams]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Note to Some: So, let's see if I've got this straight? A defender runs out to the corner to attempt to block a three point attempt. The defender legally, with no contact between the shooter, and the defender, and successfully, blocks the shot, sending the ball into the crowd (the crowd cheers) but his inertia (I love it when I get to use physics terms on the Forum) carries him into the still airborne shooter, pushing him into the third row of the bleachers, where the shooter sustains a concussion, a simple fracture of his right humerus, and a cut over his right eye that requires six stitches to close. Because the contact occurred after the shot was legally blocked, an official should rule that any subsequent contact is not a foul?

That sounds like the sort of play that his interia was out of control and lead to dangerous or rough play. If similar interia carried him past the shooter brushing hinm slightly and the player landing on their feet unphased I'm guessing most would not call the foul. So contact with an airborne shooter isn't always a foul or not always a foul. There is a middle ground in there somewhere. That middle ground is determined by size/ability of athletes, age, level, location (association), and individual judgement. I'm not going to say a player jumping and ending up on another player is never a foul just like I'm not going to say its always a foul.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Note to Some: ...

Some did not make this statement. You're basing your question off hearsay by Jeremy.

[Rooster]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Are you sure about that? The English language is a forever changing thing and always will be. If you know someone that speaks under all the rules and does not use slang, dialect or other social media language it will be a very rare occasion. Oh and the English that spoke the language speak it differently than people in the US. And people in this country never speak it the same way or understand it the same way.

Peace

It might be time to refill a prescription of chill pills.

Know Peace