Greatest Continuation on a Foul

[Murda]

I believe I know the correct resolution of this, but I can't really
find a clear justification:

Foul on the throw, throw is hovering out of bounce and the receiver
makes a greatest attempt on the disc.

A) The greatest is completed and the continuation rule applies so we
play on.
B) The greatest is not completed, but the receiver clearly possesses
(catches) the disc in the air and jumped from in bounce.
C) The greatest isn't even attempted.

In C, the disc obviously goes back...and in B it should as well and in
A the disc should remain at the completion spot. So I guess I'm
wondering what constitutes receiver possession in this situation/or
any situation for that matter?

The possession rule is a bit unclear in my opinion...to me receiver
possession means stopping rotation of the disc and establishing
position in-bounds (with ground contact in some form). So the
greatest attempting receiver never possessed the disc even when they
clearly catch it and then throw it, or even if they catch it and
subsequently land out of bounds, therefore it goes back in the
occurrence of no completion (B) and the disc stays and play continues
on if the greatest is completed (C).

What is the nuance about a receiver maintaining possession through
ground contact?

[ultimate7]

B) is a turnover

[Colin]

II.O Possession of the disc: Sustained contact with, and control of, a
non-spinning disc.

1. Catching a pass is equivalent to establishing possession of that
pass.
2. Loss of possession due to ground contact related to a catch
negates that player's possession up to that point.

The greatest-thrower definitely has possession if he catches it and
then throws it (as opposed to just tipping it or something).
Surviving ground contact is not a prerequisite for establishing ground
contact. You could establish possession while airborne (sustained
contact with and control of a non-spinning disc). This is why you
could call a strip for contact that occurs while you are airborne.

The ground contact issue is just that if you lose possession due to
ground contact, any possession up to that point is negated. So, for
example, if a defensive player makes a diving block and catches the
disc, but accidentally drops it upon landing due to contact with the
ground, the prior catch is negated and it is just treated as a blocked
pass (not a catch and drop). This is stated explicitly in XII.C, but
it applies the loss-of-possession due to ground contact principle.

As for situation B), it would be a turnover. Just make sure to loudly
announce the foul on the throw before a teammate unnecessarily
attempts a greatest on a pass that will otherwise return to the
thrower (or make sure he completes the greatest!). On the plus side,
we don't have people making leaping "free hucks" after every pass
where the thrower calls a foul (because under the current rules, those
hucks are not free - turnovers would stand).
.
-Colin

[Mark -Mortakai- Moran]

On Aug 6, 10:20 pm, Colin <colinmcint...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Surviving ground contact is not a prerequisite for establishing ground
> contact.  

And of course what Colin _meant_ to say was...

"Surviving ground contact is not a prerequisite for establishing

**possession** "

[Mark -Mortakai- Moran]

Possession requires sustained contact and control and does not require
ground contact or pivot or anything similar. It's solely related to
whether the receiver has it in his hand. (footnote: hand is an
inaccurate paraphrase... It could be between the knees or in the mouth
or trapped between head and neck, etc.) and nothing to do with whether
or where the landing may be.

And so, the instant the airborne receiver has it in his clenched hand,
he has possession and that's the first (only) pass for continuation.
It's play-on if he releases it before becoming OB, and it's back to
thrower if he lands OB while still with the disc. The play-on means
that the continuation rule resolution is done as it's back to regular
play, so the greatest throw is the *next* non-continuation pass and so
its result stands whether it's successful or not.

[Colin]

Oh, yes. Thanks. A little bit of copying and pasting gone wrong.
Sorry about that.

While I'm on here, I might as well mention, there are a couple of
places in the rules that mention ground contact as a prerequisite for
something. One is for scoring (barring a force-out foul) and another
is for calling a time-out.

Just in case the language of the different rules merged and caused
confusion. But those rules are totally separate from this scenario.

On Aug 7, 1:49 pm, Mark -Mortakai- Moran <mdmora...@hotmail.com>
wrote:

[Thomas Murray]

Well all this begs the question, what happens in the situation where there is only a one pass continuation allowed?

If a pick is called, then the disc is thrown up field it is supposed to stop at the next player...but if the next player is a person attempting the greatest how do we decide whether it was completed or not.  The next pass (the greatest) doesn't matter according to the rules, but this player has no opportunity to catch the disc in bounds on their own.  Do they just have to catch it and then they get the disc on the line regardless of where they land? No way.  Do they have to complete the greatest, and then they get it on the line? But the next pass shouldn't matter, it doesn't in any other situation.  Is it just incomplete?  That's a terrible loophole.  

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "UPA 11th edition rules" group.
To post to this group, send email to upa_11th_ed...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to upa_11th_edition_...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/upa_11th_edition_rules?hl=en.

[Alex Peters]

If he lands out of bounds holding the disc it's a turnover.

If he throws it, to anyone, or into the ground, before he lands, that
is a "second pass" which doesn't count for continuation and the disc
will go back to the thrower.

[Alan Hoyle]

Alex,

I'm just making sure about this: when you say "the thrower" in your
second sentence, you mean "the person who attempted the greatest,"
correct?

-alan

> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "UPA 11th edition rules" group.
> To post to this group, send email to upa_11th_ed...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to upa_11th_edition_...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/upa_11th_edition_rules?hl=en.
>
>

--
  -  Alan Hoyle  -  al...@unc.edu  -  http://www.alanhoyle.com/  -

[Alex Peters]

Well, in the case of a pick I guess it would be. In the case of a
travel call, it would go back to the original thrower.

[Colin]

But as Thomas suggests, this would be a totally crazy result in the
following situations with a throw after a pick call :

Situation 1: Player dives, catches the disc while airborne, lands o.b.

Situation 2: Player dives, catches the disc while airborne, sees he is
going to land o.b., and intentionally drops the disc (II.T.2).

I think we probably all agree that these situations should be treated
the same ("should" in a "best outcome" sort of way)..

Part of this issue turns on how "outcome of that pass" is defined (it
is not defined, that I know of). Complete/incomplete may not be a
sufficient definition.

Very interesting question. Worth sitting down and thinking about and
then discussing. I plan to think it over and then continue engaging
in the discussion, but not this very second. Thanks for the comment/
question, Thomas. This type of stuff is valuable.

-Colin

[Chad]

So if a pick is called and the disc is trailing out, make sure to
catch it airborne and spike it?

[Thomas Murray]

my pleasure, we had the foul on the throw and a uncompleted greatest attempt situation at Colorado Cup.  The disc went back to the thrower as that felt right...but apparently this is the wrong ruling.  It should have been a turnover.  There was a bit of debate but no one knew what to do.  

Seems like an area that isn't dealt with well in the rules.  To me it makes most sense for the greatest attempter to never have 'possessed' the disc so should it be completed in the case of a pick it would stay with the final receiver and in the case of a foul on the throw if it isn't completed it would still go back.  But, this is far from perfect because then the definition of possession would be less clear...good debate at least.

The oddest is the situations are when a one pass continuation is in play (pick/travel) and a greatest is completed or worse yet clearly caught and released but not completed.  The offense needs to make a play on the disc here or it is a turnover...but they can't technically throw it back into play.  At least with a foul on the throw the safe road as an offense is to just let the disc be and it will go back to the thrower without any fuss, but everyone loves a greatest attempt.

Tom

On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 11:24 AM, Chad <bul...@gmail.com> wrote:

So if a pick is called and the disc is trailing out, make sure to
catch it airborne and spike it?

[Alex Peters]

"To me it makes most sense for the greatest attempter to never have
'possessed' the disc so
should it be completed in the case of a pick it would stay with the
final
receiver and in the case of a foul on the throw if it isn't completed
it
would still go back"

What you have to remember is that any fix for a "greatest" also has to
apply to *any airborne catch and throw* whether the person ends up
landing out of bounds or not.

If you are proposing that if there is a foul on a throw, which I then
greatest (incomplete), it should go back to the original thrower, then
anytime there is a foul on a throw the receiver can jump-catch-throw
it into the endzone for a completely "free" shot at a goal, even if he
is in the middle of the field.

I don't really see much of a problem with how the rule is now. Yes,
it's a strange thing, but it's incredibly rare and I don't think it's
really harmful to the game. I imagine it being similar to in
basketball where if you catch a pass and land out of bounds, it's a
turnover, but hey, if you catch a pass and then peg your defender with
the ball in mid air, well it's out on them, your ball! Just smart
playing by the rules...

[Jesse Kuroiwa]

I have zero experience writing rules for anything, so I am not trying to be a jerk when I ask...

Would it be too complicated to add a fix for any airborne throw where the player jumps *from in bounds and lands out of bounds*, differentiating a "greatest" from any airborne throw?

Obviously, a player could get the freebie by trying to intentionally jump from in-bounds, catch, throw, and land out of bounds.  But this sounds even more rare (and ridiculous) than the current rule and the middle of the field "free shot at goal".

--Rufio

--

[Jon Bauman]

What fun is a greatest with no risk of turnover?

Seriously though, the question is whether putting a special case in the rules only for a throwing foul followed by greatest attempt is worth the complexity. In- and out-of-bounds rules are actually surprisingly difficult to get right, and generally we try to keep things as simple as possible. I think most of the SRC is of the opinion that this isn't worth a change.