General Marking Violations - Stall Count Issue
JCR...@gmail.com
addressed. It relates to the thrower calling first a named marking
violation followed by a general defensive violation.
Let's assume that the first call (say e.g. thrower says "fast count")
the marker disagrees but since it is not a stoppage, the marker can
only drop the count by 1 and continue the stall. Then imagine a
second defender comes in the area and the thrower says "violation",
play stops and the thrower says it was a double coverage.
Let's further assume the marker agrees with the violation call for
double coverage but disputes that the first named "fast count" call
was valid. Can the marker contest the general violation call in which
case the count would be dealt with under the count reached plus 1 or
is there no choice but to check the disc in at 1.
I don't think the 11th ed makes it clear whether a bogus first call
gives the marker the opportunity to contest defensive violation. You
could argue it either way in my view.
Flo Pfender
a brief look won't get you far on this one...
the short answer is, on a marking violation call which you think is
bogus, you can contest. This stops play (even on the first mv call)
and is treated like a contested violation call.
See
http://uparules.blogspot.com/2007/02/marking-violations-part-1.html
very far down.
Flo.
benb...@gmail.com
this diiferent than if they are uncontested? I have read through the
rules but am unsure.
-Ben Banyas
Mark -Mortakai- Moran
difference may be what happens to the disc, including who (person and/
or team) has possession, while in other cases, the difference may only
be what happens to the stall count. Travels and picks generally fall
into the latter category.
And in even other cases, the stall count, possession and repositioning
may not change at all; although there is still great value in
discussing your contest with the person who called the infraction.
I've had people withdraw their calls after hearing my logic during the
contest/discussion.
This post on the rules blog goes into a bit more detail on the
concept: http://uparules.blogspot.com/2007/02/about-calls-and-
contests.html
M
On Feb 12, 10:07 am, "benban...@gmail.com" <benban...@gmail.com>
wrote:
Josh Drury
wrote:
Yes, picks and travels are contestable. The 11th edition explicitly
acknowledges that any infranction can be contested (XVI.B), though the
10th didn't say anything about violations not being contestable, so I
would argue that in itself is not a change.
There is a difference in a contested vs uncontested offensive
violation (e.g. travel) depending on the stall count. If an offensive
violation is contested, the count comes in at the count reached plus
one or 6 if over 5; if uncontested, it is back in at the count reached
plus one or 9 if over 8 (XIV.A.5.a). So, if a travel is contested
high in the count (6 or higher), it goes back to 6 instead of coming
in at a higher number.
For a pick, it appears the count comes in at the count reached plus
one or 6 if over 5, regardless of whether it is contested or not
(XIV.A.5.b).
Other than noted above, there is no difference between a contested vs
uncontested pick or travel, other than contesting it is a way to
formally register your disagreement with the call.
JCR...@gmail.com
Scenario A.
If thrower (improperly) says "fast count" and marker says contest,
then play stops [despite XIV B. 7. "When a marking violation is
called, play does not stop"].
Because the "fast count" call is contested, it goes to count reached
minus one. XIV A. 5. b. 2.
Then when "Violation" (Double Team) is called -- the count disc comes
in at 1 - even though the "fast count" was contested.
Scenario B.
"Fast count" with no contest, followed by "Violation" (double team)
with no contest. Disc goes in 1.
On Feb 12, 1:46 pm, "Mark -Mortakai- Moran"
> > -Ben Banyas- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -