Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Magooch" data-source="post: 1048349" data-attributes="member: 17987">Yes, that is the "leverage" ruling. The application has always been interpreted to mean when a player places *their own* hand/s on another player to gain an advantage for *themselves*. If Van Ness had planted his hands on Brooks' shoulders and used that to vault himself higher into the air, you'd have a case, but that is obviously not what happened here. Getting hands on a teammate (again, after they are already engaged with a block and after the ball has been snapped) who jumps of their own volition while your hands are on them is not a "leverage" foul. Again, if you wanted to claim this is "leverage" then you'd need to call a foul on literally every single field goal attempt of every game.(And strictly by-the-book I think you'd have a hard time to make a case that LVN did anything to provide Brooks with "additional height" in any case. You're wildly overstating his role in things, and, for the millionth time - still not what the Bears' appeal is remotely about)</blockquote>

Total: 322 (members: 3, guests: 319)