Another first

[crosscountry55]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

I don't. The only way that I could rationalize this IAABO Connecticut rule would be if the wording was changed from, "if there is contact on the free throw shooter by the defender who breaks the free throw line plane, ignore contact unless intentional" to "if there is illegal contact on the free throw shooter by a defender who breaks the free throw line plane, such illegal contact must be charged as an intentional personal foul".

Otherwise, I don't get it? Why ignore a common foul during a live ball?

Between you and me, we agree. It's a stretch just for the sake of lessening a penalty. But I hope at least a committee made up of more than just officials came up with this. If it was an arbitrary IAABO declaration and CIAC wasn't represented in the decision, then shame on CIAC and they should consider dissolving their relationship with IAABO.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by crosscountry55

I hope at least a committee made up of more than just officials came up with this.

Is Peter Webb (IAABO Coordinator of Interpreters) considered a committee?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Is Peter Webb (IAABO Coordinator of Interpreters) considered a committee?

No, and if this interpretation is truly what he wrote, I would hope someone would bring it to his attention like they did with that ruling (last year or the year before) where they stated it was a violation for a player to toss a ball up in the air and catch it.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Adam

... it was a violation for a player to toss a ball up in the air and catch it.

That certainly was a doozy.