Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Wisconsin and Iowa back and forth.

Perkins called for a flop.  Haven't seen many of them called since the beginning of conference......this one was 100% correct.  Wisky player spun away from Perkins who went down without contact.

Posted
20 minutes ago, Stuhoo said:

As long as you don’t travel? Nope.

Neither can your offense teammate. Out of the cylinder and on its way down? A teammate can grab it and dunk.

I think I have a caveat in which a player CAN goal tend his own shot that doesn't hit the rim -- but it wouldn't be offensive goaltending, but rather defensive.

Let's say a defensive player goes up for a rebound and tips the ball and accidentally sends it toward the goal.  Noticing that it is going to go in, he tips it again while it's in the cylinder.  I think technically that would be goaltending your own shot.....at the wrong rim.

Posted
On 2/21/2023 at 4:10 PM, Stuhoo said:

By the way - posts about Miller's involvement are fine - he's a very good college basketball player and this is an impactful college basketball story.

Some of our other legal experts can chime in, but from my perspective, if the NCAA or Bama suspends a kid when they have no knowledge that he's done anything wrong from a legal/team/NCAA rules standpoint, they are asking for a major legal problem. However, if the evidence evolves and there is any involvement or liability by Miller, everything can change.

Without question, it's a huge 'there's no good answer' situation for Alabama, the SEC, and the NCAA.

It’s definitely a pickle …I read an article that mentioned some facts that allegedly came from arrest affidavits…without being intimately familiar with Alabama laws ( as they may differ slightly, in a general sense, from Indiana criminal code), the most interesting point of the fact pattern for me was a mention of millet having parked his vehicle in such a way that appeared to impede the movement of the victims vehicle.  The potential for criminal liability ( or defense therefrom) hinges primarily on miller having knowledge of his friends intent to commit a crime or if he should have been reasonably aware.  He could hold a position of plausible deniability if he had no knowledge of a potential conflict and simply brought the firearm at his friends request.  If he had further detail of the purpose for the request  ( which  purposefully boxing in a car could suggest via circumstantial evidence) he could open himself to co-conspirator ,felony actor, accomplice , or vicarious liability 

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...