Quote:
Originally posted by Jurassic Referee
RULE 9 SECTION 3 OUT OF BOUNDS
A player shall not cause the ball to go out of bounds.
Question - The dribbler steps on or outside a boundary, but does not touch the ball while he or she is out of bounds. Is this a violation? Answer - Yes.
Touching the ball again immediately after being OOB and then coming back in-bounds is the violation,and that is what R9-3 is telling you.If the player NEVER DOES TOUCH THE BALL after stepping OOB, then what particular violation in the rulebook then covers the play? R9-3 doesn't. The player has NEVER caused the ball to go OOB if he ends his dribble by NOT touching the ball again AFTER going OOB.Please find me a rule that says different.
|
If 9-3 doesn't cover it then nothing in the NFHS rulebook covers it. I feel it is the only thing that covers it.
By what you seem to be saying JR, it would then be okay to be dribbling, step on the line, but don't touch the ball while OOB, let the ball bounce once by itself, place both your feet back in bounds, and essentially start a new dribble - because the previous dribble ended BEFORE you stepped on the line, before you decided to not touch the ball again and allowed the ball to bounce by itself and before you reestablished your position in bounds. Is this okay JR, Dan quadruple star? I would guess that you are not going to allow this. If you did, then there would be no reason for the note.
If you aren't saying the above then I would assume that you are saying that it is the retouching that causes the violation. And I must assume that it is the retouching as a continuation of the dribble that causes the violation (What if he stepped OOB and immediately jumped back in bounds, both feet inbounds on the floor, and caught the ball - thereby stopping the dribble. Is that okay? I again guess that you would not allow that either.) Does that mean there is a rule stating: Violation if you are dribbling, step out of bounds and are the first one to touch the ball after you return to the floor. That's not a rule. Show me that rule. Perhaps you must accept this jump back in and catch the ball scenario as legal. I don't see how you can justify saying that 9-3 is not applicable if you don't.
Aaaaah, I'm fed up with this discussion. It's taxing my brain for a situation I've never seen and probably never will - a player that is quick enough witted to stop his dribble and stand OOB letting his dribble bounce away.
5 pages later! Could have spent my time more wisely.
Apologies all around!