Pick is not a breach by the offence

  • August 1, 2013 at 3:30 am #409

    I think it is a fairly common misconception that pick is an offensive breach (probably because it is the offence that causes picks). It matters for the purpose of restarting the stall count after a pick:

    9.5.2 – After an uncontested breach by the offence the stall count restarts at maximum
    nine (9 .
    9.5.4 – After all other calls the stall count restarts at maximum six (6).

    In fact, the only clear indication I found that a pick is not an offensive breach is in the interpretation of rule 9.5.4:

    9.2 Stall count after a pick (9.5.4)
    After a pick call the stall count must restart at maximum six (6).

    I suggest this either be squeezed into the pick rule itself, or at least added to the interpretations of that rule as well.

    April 8, 2014 at 7:47 am #675
    Juan Ottonello

    I have read and tried once and again to get it, but I still find the stall-after-pick rules confusing.

    david’s interpretation seems to be ok, as the interpretation 9.2 says that the rule 9.5.4 should be aplied instead of 9.5.2 (uncontested brach by the offence) The decision diagram (page 4 fo the pdf) support the same in the left branch (Disc not thrown)

    What I don’t understand is that the same diagram shows we should apply 9.5.2 if the disc was actually thrown (stall max 9) What makes the difference in that case? I went through the pick diagram several times in the last months before posting here and my intuiton still tells me that we should apply the same rule in uncontested picks (disc thrown or not) I think we should apply 9.5.2 in both cases. If someone in offence causes a pick when stall is 9, it’s called and accepted: why should the stall go back to 6?

    If it was intentional to apply 9.5.4 or 9.5.2 deppending on if the disc was thrown or not, maybe it could be a good idea to add an article to the interpretations for the case of “pick & disc thrown” (right branch of the desition tree)

    Hope it helps, the 2013 edition was a good improvement anyway 🙂

    April 8, 2014 at 9:15 am #676
    Rueben Berg

    What I don’t understand is that the same diagram shows we should apply 9.5.2 if the disc was actually thrown (stall max 9)

    Are you sure you are looking at the latest version? Because the version I just downloaded shows Stall Max 6, rule 9.5.4, for all the outcomes.

    April 8, 2014 at 3:43 pm #677
    Juan Ottonello

    :cheer: thanks rueben, my version was one year old and I hadn’t checked for updates. It’s coherent and it will be easier to explain now!

    I know this is a second question, but since we are on the subject: what is the rationale behind using stall max 6 with uncontested picks? I get a pick is not a “breach by the offence” but, is not a pick something wrong the offence do? Why should they get the stall lowered if it was 8 for example?

    I know the rule now anyway, that’s first. To know why it’s the way it is would be a plus. Thanks a lot for all your work!

    April 8, 2014 at 11:56 pm #678
    Rueben Berg

    It was changed to 6 because it is not always the offensive players fault and also to ensure we align with USAU Rules wherever possible.

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.