Re: stall count after an equipment timeout

Aaron,

> w/ the multiple equipment timeouts...why not do it the fair and
> spirited way and just keep the stall count where it was?  makes sense
> to me

According to the the 10th Edition, as Bob has pointed out: 

> Rule 6D4.2 says that if defence called it the stall resumes at last
> stall stated plus 1 or at 6 if it was over 5, if offence called it, it
> goes in at last stall stated plus 1.

So it wouldn't be fair to keep the stall count where it was, if
defence called it on Stall 9 -- according to the rules -- it would
come in at 6.

My suggestion in the event of 'equiptment' on the field would be to
penalize the team whose responsibility it is. I.e. if the dog or tent,
etc. belongs to someone on 'O' -- treat it as an O equiptment call
regardless of which team vocalized it. Same for D-fense. If thats too
precise for you, or there is no team taking ownership of the stray
'equiptment', treat it as a 'violation', in which case it would be
handled the same as a defensive equiptment call. Why should O benfit
by the potential several second stall bonus? It seems better to
preserve the offesnive possession, rather than have it jeopardized by
unsafe equiptment conditions. Since both teams are operating under the
same guidelines, and it's a random chance the 'stray dog' will run on
the field whether you're on O or D, it should be a fair way to handle
the situation.

just my thoughts...

Anthony David Adams

P.S. >> Congrats on the second bachlors degree in classical guitar
Bob. A nice addition to your academic arsenal.