[quote=”rueben” post=70]
Only when the thrower moves into a non-moving marker who is legally positioned is this a foul by the thrower. i.e. if the thrower moves into a space the marker has already occupied when the thrower started the throwing motion, and the marker is not in breach of; straddle, disc space, wrapping. All other contact will be the marker’s foul.
[/quote]
I’ve been reading up on this interpretation today and was hoping for some clarification. I think that it is pretty well established that the requirements to be “legally positioned,” as a marker are higher than, as a player off the disk. Not only must you position yourself such that a thrower can reasonably avoid contact, you must also be non-moving or static. In other playing positions you are restricted to maintaining a constant speed or predictable motion.
While I agree that markers need to have stricter restraints than other players, I have heard some pretty extreme interpretations of 17.7 which effectively state that if the marker moved at all and non intentional contact occurred it must be a defensive foul. Examples include.
1. Contact occurred between the throwers arm and the defenders arm as they released but, while that hand was not moving another part of the markers body that was not involved in the contact e.g. their other arm was moving.
2. Same situation as above but the marker was moving the hand in question away from the point of contact, so the thrower’s motion caught up with the markers.
First of all I’d be curious as to if the above examples are legitimate interpretations of 17.7 and, second if I am correct in assuming this oversteps the intention of the rule how would you proceed with a discussion after contesting such a call.
Thanks.