![]() |
I'm Not Angry, I'm Disappointed (Backcourt and Team Control)
Got my book in the mail yesterday. They did not, of course, fix the problem with the team control and it's impact on the backcourt calls in the immediate aftermath of a throw in.
By a strict reading of the rule, some very standard plays should be called violations. Unless, of course, one happens to read the handouts or the old notices, and knows differently. |
Your Suggestion?
Quote:
Did you notice how the new 4.12.2B seems to try to make up for whatever might still be lacking in the rulebook? Do you agree with all that? They did take the "or" out of 9-9-1, which clarified that somewhat, or at least made the mud clearer. Do you agree with that? (I'm still ticked off at "predominant color of the uniform" in 3-5-3b and 3-5-4a, and the obvious error in 3.5.4 if they're gonna dictate 3-5-3b and 3-5-4a. Not merely disappointed. Papa-Oscar'ed.) |
No, there are two options:
1. Return the definition of team control to what it was, and change the definition of a team control foul to include a foul committed by the throw in team from the start of the throw in until team control is established. 2. Put a note in the BC rule itself. Something to the effect of, "Following a throw in, BC restrictions do not begin until player control has been established in bounds." |
Quote:
Peace |
The intent is clear for those who know it. Newer officials don't necessarily have access to all that. And veterans who only pay half attention sometimes will read a rule a few years after it comes out and will notice team control now exists on a throw in and they'll think, "hey, this now affects a throw in." I've seen it, and "yeah, but they said in an email" isn't going to help.
|
Quote:
The wording of the ruling leaves a lot to be desired, though. Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
a. The ball is in flight during a try or tap for goal b. An opponent secures control. c. The ball becomes dead. 4-4-1: A ball which is in contact with a player or with the court is in the backcourt if either the ball or the player (either player if the ball is touching more than one) is touching the backcourt. PC control of the ball in the FC is never relevant. |
Stupid NFHS ...
Quote:
color of Team A’s jerseys are white. Prior to the game, an official notices that several Team A members are wearing (a) blue headbands and blue wristbands; or (b) beige pre-wrap around the entire head and blue wristbands. RULING: Legal in (a). Illegal equipment in (b); the headband color does not match the wristband color. The official shall inform the player and the head coach that these items are illegal and may not be worn during the game. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
They are going to claim "no TC in the FC" (which is, of course, false, but it's the same concept as on the case) |
Quote:
If they're going to rule by case play, they should simply note in the ruling of the case play what you're saying here: TC during a throw-in is only intended to affect foul situations, and all violation calls should consider TC inactive until PC is established inbounds. Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
There are no RULES on page 70. If it's published in the RULES, then it will be published each and every year. Points of Emphasis change every year, so this is NOT a fix. |
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:05pm. |