11th Ed Rules Question

[Justin]

I looked briefly into this but was not sure it gets
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 that it was a double coverage
but disputes that the first named "fast count" call was valid. Can
the marker contest the general violation (because the requirement for
the second call was a valid marking violation) -- in which
case the count would be dealt with under the count reached plus 1 or
is there no choice if the marker agrees that it was a double coverage
and checks 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. Any thoughts on this?

PS I posted this under the 11th Ed group as well but I'm not sure
anyone still reads that.

-Justin

[Flo]

Yes,
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 (stall back at 6 if
over).
See
http://uparules.blogspot.com/2007/02/marking-violations-part-1.html
very far down.

Flo.

PS: yes, 11th ed forum is still checked. We are trying to establish it
as a (civil) place to ask rules questions and get them discussed
without the regular RSD banter.

[Bob Koca]

On Feb 12, 12:26 pm, "Flo" <Flo.Pfen...@googlemail.com> wrote:
...
>
> 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 (stall back at 6 if
> over).
> Seehttp://uparules.blogspot.com/2007/02/marking-violations-part-1.html
> very far down.
>

So if I as marker go from 7 to 8 and the thrower calls a fast
count call I disagree with I can contest. Fantastic, the count is now
at 6. Is that correct?

The count going down to 6 is bad enough. Also bad though is that if
there is later on a legitimate call, double team for example, the
count has to go down to 0. It seems I can't contest the original fast
count call later on.

Bob Koca