Legal dribble or not?

BillyMac

BadNewsRef wrote
I would agree if A1 had already batted the ball to floor at least once. But in the OP I see it no different than standing in place and tossing the ball to himself before dribbling.

Which means that he can legally start a new dribble. Can I deem this now?

Adam

BillyMac wrote
Which means that he can legally start a new dribble. Can I deem this now?

Not if he picks his pivot foot up in the process.

BillyMac

Snaqwells wrote
Not if he picks his pivot foot up in the process.

Jurassic Referee

BadNewsRef wrote
I would agree if A1 had already batted the ball to floor at least once. But in the OP I see it no different than standing in place and tossing the ball to himself before dribbling.

Scrapper1 told us in the OP that A1 released the ball to start a dribble. Are you calling Scrappy a liar? Is there any reason you wouldn't believe Scrappy?

Or are you a resident of JARlandia also?

Raymond

Jurassic Referee wrote
Scrapper1 told us in the OP that A1 released the ball to start a dribble. Are you calling Scrappy a liar? Is there any reason you wouldn't believe Scrappy?

Or are you a resident of JARlandia also?

Nope, but since the dribble never occurred I'm not ruling it a violation. The dribble was deferred. 🙂

BillyMac

BadNewsRef wrote
Nope, but since the dribble never occurred I'm not ruling it a violation. The dribble was deferred.

Excellent. I'm back in the game.

jdw3018

Nobody has posted the correct response yet:

"You're saying that hit his foot? Huh."

Jurassic Referee

BadNewsRef wrote
The dribble was deferred.

An instant classic.... 😀

Back In The Saddle

Though this is the place to overthink this kind of stuff, in a game situation...I got nuthun. It's such a one in a million kind of play that nobody would ever bother to write a rule about it. And absent a rule, or a really obvious application of an existing rule, it's legal.

BillyMac

Back In The Saddle wrote
In a game situation, I got nuthun. It's such a one in a million kind of play that nobody would ever bother to write a rule about it. And absent a rule, or a really obvious application of an existing rule, it's legal.

But this isn't real life, this is the Forum. Now, are you in this hand, or not? If so, ante up.

bob jenkins

BillyMac wrote
But this isn't real life, this is the Forum. Now, are you in this hand, or not? If so, ante up.

Billy --

There are 43 responses to the OP. You have 14 of them -- more than anyone else. Most are variations on the card game crap and add nothing to what is (at least to me) an interesting intellectual exercise.

Cut it out.

Please.

Oh -- on the OP: I'm ruling it legal.

Scrapper1

bob jenkins wrote
There are 43 responses to the OP. You have 14 of them -- more than anyone else. Most are variations on the card game crap and add nothing to what is (at least to me) an interesting intellectual exercise.

Cut it out.

Please.

Bob, there are 43 threads in which Billy has posted "excessive" jokes. In 14 of them, you've objected -- more than anyone else.

Cut it out.

Please.

Adam

Scrapper1 wrote
Bob, there are 43 threads in which Billy has posted "excessive" jokes. In 14 of them, you've objected -- more than anyone else.

Cut it out.

Please.

For the record, Bob said what I was thinking.

Eastshire

I personally like the elegance of saying that since he hit his foot he didn't push the ball to the floor but to his foot and therefore didn't start a dribble.

BillyMac

bob jenkins wrote
Most are variations on the card game crap and add nothing to what is (at least to me) an interesting intellectual exercise. Cut it out. Please. On the OP, I'm ruling it legal.

I also, from the get go, found it to be an interesting intellectual challange. In most of my posts I not only voiced my opinion, and my reasons for said opinion, but also chose to use "pretend" parlimentary procedure, a chess game, and later a poker game, analogy to challenge others to keep the debate going. Seldom did I just post an analogy.

Appreciate the "Please".

Regarding the OP being legal, how about my followup situation?

A1 receives a pass and releases the ball to start a dribble. The ball hits the top of his foot, never touching the floor, and bounces straight up. A1 then catches the ball with both hands, and starts a new dribble? What do you got?

bob jenkins

BillyMac wrote
A1 receives a pass and releases the ball to start a dribble. The ball hits the top of his foot, never touching the floor, and bounces straight up. A1 then catches the ball with both hands, and starts a new dribble? What do you got?

If I really saw that, legal (assuming there was no other violation).

In practice, I think I'd think the ball had hit the floor.

BillyMac

bob jenkins wrote
If I really saw that, legal (assuming there was no other violation).

Would you consider tihs a fumble followed by a dribble?

BillyMac

bob jenkins wrote
If I really saw that, legal (assuming there was no other violation).

Would you consider this a fumble followed by a dribble?

SNIPERBBB

After going through the dribble and travel rules, assuming that "to the floor" means the ball has to hit the floor to be a "dribble", the play is legal if the player doesnt travel before hand. If this would happen during a dribble, it would be a an illegal dribble in billy's play.

Though I think this play would only occur in bizzarro world because I still cannot imagine any situation to where a dribbler can do this without another player touching the ball.

letemplay

Kicked ball? My reason being, anyone able to get the ball to come immediately back to him may be doing some "purposeful maneuvering" meaning intent. I don't know that I would call that, nobody else has suggested it.

« Previous Page Next Page »