Quote:
Originally posted by ChuckElias
Since nobody seems willing to offer any help, it seems you've brought up a difficult point. It's a major cop-out, but the answer is in the casebook. It's in case 4.43.3B.
Quote:
|
4.43.3 SITUATION B: A1 receives the ball with both feet off the floor and he/she lands simultaneously on both feet without establishing a pivot foot. A1 then jumps off both feet in an attempt to try for goal, but realizing the shot may be blocked, A1 drops the ball to the floor and dribbles. RULING: A1 has traveled as one foot must be considered to be the pivot and must be on the floor when the ball is released to start a dribble. The fact that no pivot foot had been established does not alter this ruling.
|
So even though no pivot foot has been established in such cases, one foot "must be considered" to be the pivot anyway. So in cases where no pivot has been established, we're supposed to rule as if there was one.
Maybe they should just re-word Article 4 to say "After coming to a stop when either (a) neither foot can be a pivot or (b) no pivot has been established. . ."
Now what about a player who hops around on his non-pivot foot?
[Edited by ChuckElias on Aug 5th, 2004 at 02:38 PM]
|
Thanks ChuckElias for offering your help on this. I feel flatered if you think this is a difficult one.
The case you mentioned is about "starting dribble after assumed pivot foot leaves the floor", which NCAA rule is "Black and White" at least in this regard.
But how come the NCAA rule seemingly leaves the door open for the "up and down with the ball" move? is it too fundimental to worth mentioning? Any more thoughts on this?
Thanks.