Act of Shooting

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Adam

Nowhere does this specify a player: the fact that it just says "defense" implies, to many of us, that it would apply to a coach from the defensive team as well.

It's certainly arguable, but it's far from "clear."

Uh, that was my point. You have quoted the wrong case play. The continuous motion rule applies to all defensive fouls whether personal or technical. That ruling clearly states that the ball becomes dead unless the act of shooting has already begun.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Uh, that was my point. You have quoted the wrong case play. The continuous motion rule applies to all defensive fouls whether personal or technical. That ruling clear states that the ball becomes dead unless the act of shooting has already begun.

Yet, why would there be a case that applies to anyone which says to wait until after the shot when there is an obvious scoring opportunity for the other team? Why do we penalize a team more harshly for an infraction by bench personnel than a player who commits the same infraction?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Uh, that was my point. You have quoted the wrong case play. The continuous motion rule applies to all defensive fouls whether personal or technical. That ruling clearly states that the ball becomes dead unless the act of shooting has already begun.

Yeah, I misunderstood what you were saying. I thought you were saying the continuous motion exception only applied on a foul committed by a player, and not a technical committed by someone on the bench.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Adam

Yeah, I misunderstood what you were saying. I thought you were saying the continuous motion exception only applied on a foul committed by a player, and not a technical committed by someone on the bench.

Actually, that is true too.