![]() |
|
|
|||
Quote:
The justification at lower levels for an enforcement from the previous spot is that the players don't catch as well, so the rules don't presume the fouled player would've caught the ball. |
|
|||
Quote:
__________________
Pope Francis |
|
|||
I don't understand what you mean. Because they know the play, shouldn't they be even more liable in some way for PI? How does the advantage of knowing the play mitigate their player's responsibility to not interfere with an opponent's attempt at a catch? A defender might have his back to the ball and not know a pass is on the way.
|
|
|||
Quote:
__________________
Pope Francis |
|
|||
They are, but that doesn't make them wrong. NCAA got rid of the LOD for OPI in the 1980s IIRC. NFL I don't remember -- might've gotten rid of it about 15 yrs. earlier or maybe went straight from loss of ball to the distance penalty with no LOD. I believe it was loss of ball in Canadian football until some time in the 1960s, as with other loose ball interference.
|
|
|||
Quote:
__________________
Pope Francis |
|
|||
Meanwhile NCAA has gone back & forth on the enforcement spot against the defense. I don't remember what it was at first, but it was either, or soon became, from the previous spot. Then it was changed to spot of the foul. Then back to previous spot. Fed inherited the penalty from the first time it was previous spot, and kept it.
|
|
|||
Quote:
Peace
__________________
Let us get into "Good Trouble." ----------------------------------------------------------- Charles Michael “Mick” Chambers (1947-2010) |
![]() |
Bookmarks |
|
|