The case book doesn't address this sit. that I can find. However, as ya'll point out, the emphasis on control is clear as far as whether a dribble is a dribble.
I've been a tad over officious on this play. But I've gotten it right too. (I just didn't know why.)
Now I have another question. Why do you suppose we have a POE on palming? Do you think it could be that officials have been reluctant to call it do the judgment factor? Did he really end the dribble? Or is he good enough of a ball handler to change direction or step past the defender without a carry?
Maybe it's better to err on the side of a no call? Is that how this has evolved into a POE? Is it really better to not call something unless it is blatant?
I'm saying that sometimes my judgment on whether the player gained an advantage by either tipping or batting and then gathering with two hands is a double dribble can be a good call.
A palming call when the dribbler carries the ball past his defender is a good call. Why pass? Why doubt?
Is an error of omission really better that an error of commission?