Pass Off Backboard

Rob1968

Camron Rust wrote
You are, of course, right. But it is overthinking that can lead to understanding the true meaning of the related rules whether it is for this situation or others that will require knowing the exact meaning of the rules.
This is just good exercise in rules study.

I agree that your comment regarding the value of this discussion. The difficulty is in the application. Just last night, I had the wondeful, "But it was touched by the defense!" comment from a coach, when all the neccessary elements for my backcourt call were present . . .

Rob1968

BadNewsRef wrote
So A1 gets stuck behind his own basket, A1 throws the ball at the bottom flat edge of the backboard and catches it, he should now be allowed a new dribble b/c you are judging what he did as a try?

Because of this discussion, I'd consider not allowing a second dribble. But, it might be tempered by how much he!! I'd be willing to take, from the kid's coach, fans, my partner(s), at that moment . . .

Rob1968

BillyMac wrote
I disagree with the idea that the Federation wants us to treat virtually all of these as a try because if they wanted that, they would have said it, in either the rule, or in a case play.

However, unless it's some type of written rules exam, I believe that most of us, possibly including me, would treat virtually all of these as a try, whether we're backed by rule, or not.

Case Book 4.15.4 C (c) indicates that the NF considers the second dribble to be legal. (This is the simple wording I was refering to, earlier.)

Raymond

Rob1968 wrote
Case Book 4.15.4 C (c) indicates that the NF considers the second dribble to be legal. (This is the simple wording I was refering to, earlier.)

Only if it is judged to be a try. Otherwise there would not be the need for this portion of the case play: " in an attempt to score (try), "

Rob1968

BadNewsRef wrote
Only if it is judged to be a try. Otherwise there would not be the need for this portion of the case play: " in an attempt to score (try), "

Agreed. Has any of us ever seen, a) a player attempt to utilize this action? - b) an official call the second dribble a violation? The frequency of such actions must be minute.

Raymond

Rob1968 wrote
Agreed. Has any of us ever seen, a) a player attempt to utilize this action? - b) an official call the second dribble a violation? The frequency of such actions must be minute.

Because of this thread it will probably happen in my next game.

BktBallRef

BadNewsRef wrote
So A1 gets stuck behind his own basket, A1 throws the ball at the bottom flat edge of the backboard and catches it, he should now be allowed a new dribble b/c you are judging what he did as a try?

MD Longhorn wrote
He did use the qualifier "virtually". I think your sitch would be the exception to everything else he said.

So you would call a double dribble?

Not me. If it hits any part of the backboard other than the back, I don't care what he does with it if he catches it.

Raymond

BktBallRef wrote
So you would call a double dribble?

Not me. If it hits any part of the backboard other than the back, I don't care what he does with it if he catches it.

I wouldn't allow him to dribble again after catching it.

MD Longhorn

BktBallRef wrote
So you would call a double dribble?

Not me. If it hits any part of the backboard other than the back, I don't care what he does with it if he catches it.

I'm not sure that's in line with what they want us to call. This interp is giving a player a get-out-of-jail free card that's not intended.

Player dribbles, stops to shoot but gets stuck and doesn't shoot.. then hits the bottom of the basket on purpose with the ball and starts dribbling again? Are you really saying you'd have no violation for that?

deecee

MD Longhorn wrote
I'm not sure that's in line with what they want us to call. This interp is giving a player a get-out-of-jail free card that's not intended.

Player dribbles, stops to shoot but gets stuck and doesn't shoot.. then hits the bottom of the basket on purpose with the ball and starts dribbling again? Are you really saying you'd have no violation for that?

This sounds like a last ditch shot attempt to me. Players would sooner throw the ball of an opponent and start to dribble again than think they could just do that off the bottom of the backboard.

« Previous Page