|
|
Had an incident in our game today where Huck U actually scored a point. As we are clearly defensive experts, and offense is something we obviously struggle with, I thought I'd ask the experts out there for a rule interpretation.
Our receiver caught the pass on or just outside the goal line and their momentum took them into the end zone. They ran the disc back to the line, checked it in by tapping the disc on the ground and proceeded to make an awesome pass to score a point.
Following the point, our player took issue with the fact that when he rose from tapping the disc, the marker was already at stall 4. I assume the marker must have started the stall count when the catch was made or the marker within 3m of the receiver shortly after catching up to his lost mark.
I'm pretty sure the offensive player is required in this instance to return to the point of contact on the line or outside the end zone. The question then becomes, if we assume the stall count can begin when it did, is a disc check required or only the establishment of a pivot. If a disc check is required, should not the stall count start at that point?
Thoughts?
|
|
|
|
(CUT AND PASTE FROM MY OTHER POST - NO NEED FOR DUPLICATE DISCUSSIONS)
There was discussion today on the field about this issue. In post game discussions, there was no certainty about the rules. So we agreed to post to the forum.
The Situation:
Offensive player catches the disc and runs into the endzone. He is called "not in", and returns to the end zone line to check. No travel was called as there was no infraction at that point. Upon checking the disc in at the line, the stall count had already been initiated, and was in excess of 3 (I believe...the actual number I don't recall from post-game discussions).
The Question:
Was the stall count legally initiated, or should it have waited until the check? (This is not a question about the dick rule, which people seem to believe exists and applies to many violations and situations. That is a mythical rule...I checked)
My Opinion...for what little it is worth:
http://www.usaultimate.org/resources/officiating/rules/11th_edition_rules.aspx#XIII.A.2
XIV.A.2 Only the marker (II.K) may initiate or continue a stall count, and may do so anytime a thrower has possession of a disc that is live or in play. However, directly after a turnover or when putting the pull into play the stall may not be initiated before a pivot is established, unless delay of game or pre-stall rules (XIII.A.3, XIII.A.4, XIII.A.5 or VI.B.5.d) apply.
Bold added by myself.
As there was no infraction, it would appear to me that play continues, and the stall count was legal. Although this also does not appear logical to me, because if the handler had not checked he would have traveled, and there would have been a stoppage of play that meant the stall count could not continue. So in theory, he would have been better off to violate the rules in this situation. I am sure I am messing something up there, because that can't be correct.
Those wiser than me...what are your thoughts? |
|
|
|
| The stall count is legal. A stall count may start as soon as a receiver has control of a disc (different rules apply to a defender intercepting a disc). If the handler had not checked the disc, a travel could have been called, but that would not have reset the stall count, it would only have stopped it (and the throw wouldn't have counted). |
|
|
|
I agree with Bill as it is easier to be on his side then to argue against him.
FYI - Jumping and landing in the endzone avoids this kind of issue.
|
|
|
|
| I understand that this also applies if the momentum takes you out of bounds (say on the sideline), so you can count stalls (within 3m of where the player went OB) even though the disc is no longer "in play". |
|
|
|
| Yes, the same rule applies for a player who goes out of bounds. Otherwise a player could take his time, have a look down field to see what's happening and plan their next move. |
|