Quote:
Originally Posted by Camron Rust
I can't...and have said earlier that I coule easily make argument for both the illegal dribble and the traveling. My angles was to point out the reasons why a travel could be a valid call.
Not really. That case includes the ball bouncing on the floor. So, it wouldn't settle anything about whether a ball tossed into the air and caught before landing is a dribble (illegal dribble).
In fact, the another case play that is just as close covers a player tossing the ball into the air and catching it without moving their feet. The ruling in that case is that such action is not a dribble or a travel.
|
Well, since that case play does call it a dribble, it would obviously follow that touching the ball twice before it hits the floor is a violation, per the dribble rule.
I do agree tossing and catching the ball without moving the feet makes it sound like it belongs in the travel section. But maybe it's simply an action that the committee feels is not something that provides an unfair advantage to a player, so they just wanted to clarify that it's a legal play. My feeling is still that the two sections of this case play need to be separated, without any further clarification as to why they should be considered under the same rule. Remember, both parts were considered an illegal dribble before the change, even though I would've argued the part about tossing the ball in the air without moving the feet didn't belong in the dribble section.
Anybody have Mary Struckhoff's number?
