Quote:
Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.
I am joining this thread a little late, and I apologize for my posting go be somewhat on the lengthy side. The play being discussed in this thread can be grouped with two other plays where the logic to determine whether or not a violation has occurred is the same.
Play #1: The play being discussed in this thread.
Play #2: A1 lifts his pivot foot before releasing the ball to start a dribble.
In both of the above plays, A1 has committed a floor violation. A1 has caused the ball to go out-of-bounds in #1, and has committed traveling violation in #2.
The question that is germane to both plays is: When did the violation occur?
This thread has produced two main schools of thought with regard to Play #1: 1) A1 causes the ball to go out-of-bounds as soon as he touches out-of-bounds even though he is not touching the ball when he touches out-of-bounds; or 2) A1 does not cause the ball to go out-of-bounds unless he has out-of-bounds status the next time he touches the ball.
Similar logic can be applied to Play #2. 1) A1 travels when he releases the ball to start a dribble; or 2) A1 travels when he touches the ball after it has rebounded from the floor.
When Dick Schindler was still the NFHS Rules Editor, Play #2 was discussed great length at an IAABO Fall Rules Interpreter's Conference and Dick Schindler took part in the discussion. Many interpreters thought that the then and still current Casebook play was not correct (they took Position #2.). Their reasoning was: The official does not know if A1 is releasing the ball for a dribble or a pass. If A1 does not again touch the ball then he did not start a dribble. The logic for defending this position is the same as defending Position #2 in Play #1.
The casebook play states that A1 has traveled when A1 releases the ball to start his dribble. Dick took Position #1 which is the casebook ruling. One can see from reading both the rules and casebook plays that in Play #1 A1 has committed a out-of-bounds violation as soon as he touched out-of-bounds with his foot and that in Play #2 A1 has committed a traveling violation as soon as he released the ball to start a dribble. It is the position of the Rules Committee that in both Plays #1 and #2, is that the official is not to wait until A1 retouches the ball to for the violation to be called.
|
It appears to me that the issue is when player control ends. In your "comparable" play, the ball-handler clearly still has player contol when the pivot foot is lifted. In the play I'm describing, I contend that since we can't normally use the player's intent or thinking to judge, we should judge only by what we see (anticipate the play, not the call) and not define player control further than we can prove it with tape.