Would it count in basketball, if a player found themselves directly under the hoop, threw the ball up through the hoop from underneath, and the ball fell back down, again through the hoop?
No it won’t be counted as it’s considered a ‘violation’. Ref will blow the whistle stating as such and the ball will be handed over to the defending team.
RULE 9 - VIOLATIONS AND PENALTIES Section 6. Travel, Kick, Fist, Through Basket from Below A player shall not travel or run with the ball, intentionally kick it, strike it with the fist or cause it to pass through the basket and enter the cylinder from below.
i think it cancels the point out, you lose a point then gain a point.
Say hello to negative scores!
I have no idea of basketball rules. So if a player throws the ball upwards through the opponent’s hoop, they lose a point?
I could be wrong but I seem to remember this is one of the reasons why the baskets have a net.
You're not allowed to do that but if the net wasn't there then in pre-video games the refs might not be able to spot if the ball went up through the hoop.
Think they were also to stop players reaching up through the hoop to defend as well.
no.
but if you throw it backwards through your own hoop...
that should definitely take points off the other team, right? (/s. it has no robots and is therefore boring to me. Maybe if they added flame traps or, like, electrotraps. i dunno. that just seems sadistic.) (baseball needs the trap-makeover first, though. it's only slightly better than golf.)
maybe if they added flame traps
I think you might be thinking of Orcs Must Die! instead of basketball.
I'd say baseball is worse than golf. Baseball is supposedly a spectator sport, while golf never was.
Golf is a game. Yes, there's physical ability involved, but it has a handicap system - meaning you're always playing against yourself. Players of disparate abilities and skill can play together. You don't need anyone else to play a game of golf (in fact, I'd love to be able to play by myself).
Baseball, a "team sport", has developed into batter VS pitcher, it's a rather binary game even when the ball is fielded. Get rid of "over the fence", make that a foul, (and move the pitchers mound farther away) and you'll see the game become much more interesting. How can you have a sport where some players are too big to run, because home runs are a valid, and frequent event? I've been to a total 3 games in my life, each had more than one ball over the fence. Clearly it's not hard enough.
Moving the mound would reduce speeds so we'll see more nuanced batting. As it is we largely get attempts at the fence, or bunts, as anything else is too easily caught. With slower ball speeds, we may see more fast grounders between base lines.
The blatant steroid use was a major contributor to this issue.
But changing any of that reduces the marketing value, and baseball is probably the worst offender when it comes to changing to meet marketing (and that's saying something, with the BS done by the NFL).
Futurama's "Blurnsball" lampooned it the best.
(I'm not even a sports fan, at all. Never watch anything, just don't find watching others ay interesting).
Also, golf already has traps.
Just saying ;)
But you’re right, golf was never meant for spectators, the two are more less just as boring as each other, though.
Golf has an advantage in that most people who watch it, usually put it on in the background.
Only if a dog does it.
Is that the plot of Air Bud? Idk, I only know the meme
Isn't it a lane violation just being under the hoop in the first place?
In the NBA, Rule 6.I.e.2. shows
As an infraction that awards the other team possesion of the ball. So if this happens and the referee blows the whistle to call it out or even indicates that this infraction occurred after the fact, then the ball was dead and so the ball falling back in the basket does not count for points.
Same in NCAA and FIBA. The moment the ball enters the cylinder from below, it's the same as going out of bounds. Play stops and the ball is awarded to the team that did not touch the ball last.
Where is that in relation to the section saying dogs can't play?