Thread: new rule
View Single Post
  #52 (permalink)  
Old Sat Dec 24, 2005, 11:11am
bob jenkins bob jenkins is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 18,219
Quote:
Originally posted by johnny1784
Quote:
Originally posted by Camron Rust
From last year and this year:
"9-3 NOTE: The dribbler has committed a violation if he/she steps on or outside a boundary, even though he/she is not touching the ball while he/she is out of bounds."

Is the player a dribbler? Yes. Did they step OOB? Yes. Violation.

[/B]

My example was player A1 in bounds has dribble, passes ball thru defenders legs, goes out of bounds, returns onto court and continues to dribble. Violation 9-3-2.

Lat year, the above violation 9-3-2 was called a techincal.

If A1 has the dribble on the court, continues their dribble while touching the boundary line, violation even though during his/her dribble while being out of bounds the ball was not touching, it is said to have caused it to be out of bounds. Violation 9-3-1.


[/B][/QUOTE]

Sigh.

No, johnny, it wasn't.

Last year, there was no 9-3-2, there was only a 9-3. It's the same as this year's 9-3-1, plus the NOTE that Camron posted above. This year, they added the part about a player (not the dribbler) going OOB and returning. Since they added a part, they had to renumber it to 9-3-1 (the old rule) and 9-3-2. They left the note.

You asked for some history, so I found this in the '97-'98 book (I can't find the earlier books):
Quote:
9-3 Ques. -- 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. Ans. -- Yes.
You'll note that this is essentially the same as today's comment.

At one point, this was true even of an interrupted dribble. The rule was changed to make it *not* apply in that case.
Reply With Quote