[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by bainsey

Ah, there lies where we part ways.

Your viewpoint: It's illegal, because it's not a dribble.
My viewpoint: It can't be an illegal dribble, until it's a dribble first. THEN, you determine whether it's legal or illegal.

The ball was released (pushed, batted) on it's way to the floor, that's what makes it a dribble, per 4-15-1 and 4-15-2. The fact that it never made it to the floor without being touched a second time by the same player then makes it a violation.

Originally Posted by bainsey

And since it never was a dribble, it can't be an illegal dribble; therefore, travelling applies.


I can see your sticking point here. The best description I can provide is that the ball was touched twice, in two different places. (Initially, I thought travelling didn't apply, because there were no feet on the floor on the first touch, but I've since been proven wrong.) Two touches in two places without an established dribble = travelling (sic), since the dribble never took place.

Unfortunately, you have no rules backing for the above statement. Where is that mentioned in 4-44, or any of the 4.44 case plays?

Originally Posted by bainsey

Uh, no. A player can dribble, and I still maintain it's not a dribble? Now you lost me.

C'mon now - see in red above.

Again, you are maintaining it was never a dribble. So what was the action? And what rule do you use to back either assertion?