|
Here are the 2 casebook examples for NCAA that seem a bit inconsistent to me. Why does 149 imply that a factor is that A1 "was not in control of the ball when leaving the playing court" when ruling he can be the first to touch when returning, yet in 261 it doesn't seem to matter if someone has caught it (thus is in control) and throws it back onto the court and is first to touch. The player control seems to only be an issue if a player is actually in the process of dribbling.
A.R. 149. A1 deflects a pass near the end line. The ball falls to the floor
inbounds but A1, who is off balance, falls outside the end line. A1 returns to
the playing court, secures control of the ball, and dribbles.
RULING: Legal. A1 has not left the playing court voluntarily and was
not in control of the ball when leaving the playing court. The same
is true when A1 makes a try from under the basket and momentum
carries A1 off the playing court. It is legal when the try is unsuccessful,
and A1 comes onto the playing court and regains control of the ball.
(Rule 7-1.1, 4-23.1.a and 9-3)
A.R. 195. A1, while airborne, catches the ball in an attempt to prevent a
live ball from going out of bounds. A1 throws the ball to the floor as his
momentum causes A1 to land out of bounds. A1 returns to the playing court
where he:
1. Recovers the ball; or
2. Continues to dribble.
The official calls a traveling violation. Is the official correct?
RULING 1 and 2: No. The official was incorrect in calling a traveling
violation because when A1 caught the ball while airborne, A1 had no
established pivot foot. When A1 threw the ball to the floor, returned
to the floor after being legally out of bounds and was the first to touch
the ball, it became a dribble.
1: When A1 recovered the ball, the dribble ended.
2: A1 is permitted to continue his dribble.
(Rule 9-5.2 through .7, 4-13.2 and 4-13.4.a)
|