4.6.1. Carrying is defined as supporting the ball with the mallet head, with gravity providing the force which holds the ball in the mallet head.
isnt gravity always kinda providing the force that allows scoopings ? and i see a few ones that could be called carrying.
what are we really trying to disallow here is holding the ball up in the mallet like a ice cream cone.
please define what exactly is forbiden just for good form ( video content )
if you stop the motion of you mallet and the ball stay in, thats carrying, not like scooping, if you only use the centripetal force, as soon as you stop the motion the ball will fall
No. Its the inertia of the ball that keeps it in the head when you accelerate it. Unless you carry it around like an egg in a spoon, then it would be gravity.
This rule has been pretty much the same for over a decade. It is well understood what it means. What needs to be fixed? I have seen 0 carries in competitive games as long as I can think.
when the ball is in a corner or immobile , and you scoop it without wrist motions, its more of a gravity lift ,although the mallet is in motion. 
this type of scoop i recently unlocked them with the new open end that are way bigger than in 2012 -2014
i havnt done that many tourney since retirement so might have missed some stuff sorry for asking
the beginning of that first scoop in the video is fine - the fact that you accelerate the mallet “pushes” the ball into the scoop end of the mallet (thanks to inertia), so that you can lift it - this is legal
but the scoop gets illegal pretty fast after that when you stop the ball and have it just sit there in the head, here the force holding it in place is gravity
an example which is legal (IMO) can be seen here:
the main force holding the ball in place is the acceleration of the mallet, and the ball is released right when the mallet stops accelerating
and then there’s the wrist-movement scoop where the direction is changed, but I don’t think that there should be any confusion about which force is at play there
thanks for clarifying, so i do understand the rule properly and hope everyone does with these exemples.
i just recently discovered a line in the ruleset that “scoop can only be done for 3 changes of directions” what does that mean ?
3 direction changes because else you could do an infinite legal scoop, by going back and forth and back and forth …
I admit I personally don’t see how an infinite scoop is any useful, but it may lead to dangerous play of some sort so it was agreed to put a reasonable limit to scooping. So you can e.g. pull the ball back on your forehand side, scoop it up and around your front wheel to your backhand side, reverse it again and make a pass within 3 direction changes. Anything more than that is probably silly/useless.
check this video out, plenty of direction changes going on here 
oooh i see i thought i could only scoop to myself 3 times ( scoop / release in another direction ) my bad !
it would be nice to have a limit to auto scooping just to incentive the passing a bit more ( like in basket ball you can only pass after holding the ball with two hands sort of mechanism)
Thanks for the videos, really helpful.
Infinite scoop direction changes wouldn’t be possible because of the 2 sec scoop rule right?
How would you count the release?
There is a 2s ball joint (not scoop) and a 3 direction changes for scoops. You could replace the latter by a 2s limit, but those are tiny details that don’t change a thing.
I have a much bigger problem with the culture of having in fact 3-4s ball joints because nobody is ever strict on the 2s. It really annoys me.
i’m strict 
does it really matter tho if the ball joint is 1second late ? the timed limit was to prevent people from ball joint infinitely across the court but we went from that to really restrict the ball joint , when its actually one of the easiest way to pass and have a succesful team passing play
We initially had a 3s limit which was reffed as 5s, so we changed it to 2s, which led to 3-4s. It bugs me. If somebody spends 4s in the crease they will get penalised much more likely. 3s is 3s. 2s is 2s if you ask me. Very often an unfair advantage is gained from doing extended ball joints and nobody cares.
i think its like that for a lot of sports with time limit, you always give a 1second margin.
also you might give rhe player a vocal warning the first time you think he is abusing the time limit and then sanction if its repeated, but plain stopage of game or giving advantage + how pnealties escalation work u might not want to give that foul for every 3 second ball joint you see…
if so then the players should only use 1 sec ball joints just to be safe from being called and thats really not interesting gameplay wise, it helps so much to build team plays at any level ! make extracting the ball from corners / board way faster and imo a great move that shouldnt get sanctioned
https://official.nba.com/2015-16-points-of-emphasis-memos-memo-12-the-offensive-three-second-rule/#
on the same spirit , with our timed rules , if the player is imminently releasing the ball joint or iminently exiting the crease , the ref should revised if he actually call him for that ( if it has no huge incident on the game ie a stoped goals )
i subconsciously apply that kind of logic myself as a ref , i want to minimize the impact of my calls on the game and rather make sure both team have fair chances.