I also cannot think straight

[Dad]

Originally Posted by deecee

Finally heard back from my rules interpreter.

This sounds like a judgement call. If you feel that A1 was in the act of passing the ball and then tried to hold up but releases the pass anyway, I would say it is a violation if A1 was the first to touch the ball. If you feel A1 legitimately fumbled the ball without attempting to pass it, then it could be argued that A1 could be the first to pick up the ball. I think if A1 started any kind of passing motion and then tried to bring it back and lost the ball in the process, I would call it a pass and at that point and A1 could not be the first to pick up the ball.

What rules interpreter? An association can have a rules interpreter who has less knowledge than a first year official.

Is this your wording after speaking with a rules interpreter or their exact words?

[deecee]

Originally Posted by Dad

What rules interpreter? An association can have a rules interpreter who has less knowledge than a first year official.

Is this your wording after speaking with a rules interpreter or their exact words?

cut and paste from the email. Mind you this is also how at a college camp several years ago this was explained. Happened in a game I had, my partner didn't blow the whistle. Evaluator said something along the line of if he was trying to pass and then changed his mind but the ball still came out it's part of the pass and should have been a violation. No one gave much thought or conversation to it much after as it seemed pretty common sense.

The evaluator was a NCAA tourney official so I took his word for it, unless someone above him, or my assignor, rules interpreter, someone with more experience tells me otherwise.

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by deecee

Finally heard back from my rules interpreter.

If you feel A1 legitimately fumbled the ball without attempting to pass it, then it could be argued that A1 could be the first to pick up the ball. I think if A1 started any kind of passing motion and then tried to bring it back and lost the ball in the process, I would call it a pass and at that point and A1 could not be the first to pick up the ball.

Deecee, I disagree with your interpreter. If the player legitimately fumbled the ball..... it is a fumble. Doesnt matter if he was originally in a passing motion. we will agree to disagree on this one. take care.

[Dad]

Originally Posted by deecee

cut and paste from the email. Mind you this is also how at a college camp several years ago this was explained. Happened in a game I had, my partner didn't blow the whistle. Evaluator said something along the line of if he was trying to pass and then changed his mind but the ball still came out it's part of the pass and should have been a violation. No one gave much thought or conversation to it much after as it seemed pretty common sense.

The evaluator was a NCAA tourney official so I took his word for it, unless someone above him, or my assignor, rules interpreter, someone with more experience tells me otherwise.

Thank you.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by deecee

The evaluator was a NCAA tourney official so I took his word for it, unless someone above him, or my assignor, rules interpreter, someone with more experience tells me otherwise.

We see such officials blow calls/rules all the time. He was incorrect.

[ODog]

Originally Posted by deecee

... Evaluator said something along the line of if he was trying to pass and then changed his mind but the ball still came out it's part of the pass ... No one gave much thought or conversation to it much after as it seemed pretty common sense.

This thread has basically morphed into discussing the NFL's infamous "Tuck Rule."

(Edit: Sorry, BNR, didn't see that you beat me to it on Page 2 )

[ODog]

Originally Posted by SD Referee

Let's assume that somebody doesn't call this a double dribble, which I agree it is. Could the "secondary" call (if you miss the double dribble) be a travel? You essentially ended up passing to yourself after you lost your dribble. I think that is the call that the crowd, coaches, and players would understand and not argue with.

SD, I know you said you're a state tournament official in the thread where you said you have somehow never given a technical foul to a coach (in a career that spans 10+ years, I believe) ... and now you say THIS?!

Are you pulling our leg or are you really pretending to be a legitimate official?

"Passing to yourself" = not possible; "fanboy" talk, as others on here would say
"The call that the crowd, coaches, players would understand and not argue with" = since when has that EVER mattered?! Nothing matters less, in fact.

These are some troubling theories, whether you're just starting out or do in fact have the experience, errr, years you claim to possess.

[Nevadaref]

I thought of another example for deecee's officiating philosophy.

A1 attempts bank shot. B1 jumps, takes a swing at the ball, but misses and strikes the backboard.

Applying deecee's philosophy this is bad defense and should result in a technical foul because the player smacked the backboard. The rest of us would use our judgment to discern if the player made a legitimate attempt to block the shot as the NFHS rules and case plays say.

I believe that this situation provides another clear example of how basketball officiating requires making judgments of the players' actions and cannot be done by defaulting to some philosophy of good & bad offense or defense.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by deecee

cut and paste from the email. Mind you this is also how at a college camp several years ago this was explained. Happened in a game I had, my partner didn't blow the whistle. Evaluator said something along the line of if he was trying to pass and then changed his mind but the ball still came out it's part of the pass and should have been a violation. No one gave much thought or conversation to it much after as it seemed pretty common sense.

The evaluator was a NCAA tourney official so I took his word for it, unless someone above him, or my assignor, rules interpreter, someone with more experience tells me otherwise.

BS and here's why.

A1 ends a dribble and is holding the ball. He holds it with two hands over and behind his head while looking to pass to a teammate. As he attempts to throw the ball forward it slips out of his hands and falls to the floor behind him.

According to Mr. College Guy Evaluator, A1 cannot recover the ball.
I would say that about 95% of the forum members would disagree.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by johnny d

Please look up the definition of dribble and then compare it to what the OP actually says before you spew this nonsense.

Originally Posted by deecee

Before you try and get into a match of wits I'll spell it out for you since your rule book is probably misplaced

4-15-1: A dribble is ball movement caused by a player in control who bats (intentionally strikes the ball with the hand(s)) or pushes the ball to the floor once or several times. It is not a part of a dribble when teh ball touches a player's own backboard.

1-15-3: The dribble begins by pushing, throwing or batting the ball to the floor before the pivot foot is lifted.

Now, stay with me, because it may go over your head. How can a player with control go to make a pass (an intentional act) then intentionally change his mind, and you call that a FUMBLE?????

A fumble is when a player goes to pick up his dribble cut FUMBLES gathering the ball. You can't have control of the ball with both hands go to pass, change your mind and then suddenly FUMBLE. It's throwing the ball to the floor and the start of a dribble.

I realize I'm a bit late here, but this needs addressed.

Knock it off with the personal insults.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

I believe that this situation provides another clear example of how basketball officiating requires making judgments of the players' actions and cannot be done by defaulting to some philosophy of good & bad offense or defense.

Agreed. Another example of someone hearing a camp-cliche and applying it where it doesn't belong.

It's not unlike putting apples in the orange juice.

[Dad]

Originally Posted by Adam

Agreed. Another example of someone hearing a camp-cliche and applying it where it doesn't belong.

It's not unlike putting apples in the orange juice.

What's wrong with smoothies??

[billyu2]

Originally Posted by deecee

cut and paste from the email. Mind you this is also how at a college camp several years ago this was explained. Happened in a game I had, my partner didn't blow the whistle. Evaluator said something along the line of if he was trying to pass and then changed his mind but the ball still came out it's part of the pass and should have been a violation. No one gave much thought or conversation to it much after as it seemed pretty common sense.

The evaluator was a NCAA tourney official so I took his word for it, unless someone above him, or my assignor, rules interpreter, someone with more experience tells me otherwise.

FWIW, with about 1:25 remaining in the Kentucky-Louisville game today, a player from Kentucky had the ball around foul-line extended. He was attempting to throw a one hand pass back out to the point guard when the ball slipped out of his hand. The ball went up in the air toward the point guard. The player took a couple of quick steps and recovered the ball before it hit the floor. The covering official evidently ruled this to be a fumble so no violation needed to be called. Perhaps someone can post the video.

[SD Referee]

Originally Posted by ODog

SD, I know you said you're a state tournament official in the thread where you said you have somehow never given a technical foul to a coach (in a career that spans 10+ years, I believe) ... and now you say THIS?!

Are you pulling our leg or are you really pretending to be a legitimate official?

"Passing to yourself" = not possible; "fanboy" talk, as others on here would say
"The call that the crowd, coaches, players would understand and not argue with" = since when has that EVER mattered?! Nothing matters less, in fact.

These are some troubling theories, whether you're just starting out or do in fact have the experience, errr, years you claim to possess.

Well I wasn't there to see EXACTLY how it happened and am trying to go off a typed description.

If somebody dribbles, then picks it up, fumbles it and then retrieves it. The whole place is going to yell "TRAVEL!!!!!!" I wouldn't argue with somebody that calls the travel.

You know that a large percentage of players are going to try to retrieve the ball by batting down at, giving the appearance of a dribble. The question then becomes by batting down at it, making contact, and getting the ball to bounce up, does that constitute double dribble? I don't think you can have anything other than a violation in this example.

I don't care what anybody other than me and my partners think, but a travel seems like a logical call and a call that the crowd, players, and coaches will buy. I don't think either coach or any of the players would argue it if it happens like it is happening in my mind.

Thank you for the condescending post regarding my knowledge and experience. I know some guys on here think they are god's gift to officiating and love to talk to down to other posters. Are you in that category? Like I said above, it's hard to picture what happened without being there. If somebody calls it a travel or double dribble, I have no problem with that and I would probably call one of them too. Whether you care about what anybody else in the arena thinks doesn't matter, but you have to admit that a travel call probably keeps the place quiet and isn't a necessarily wrong call. I know you can fumble, dribble, fumble. You cannot dribble, fumble, dribble. Without seeing the actual action, it's hard to say what the correct call was or is.

I also didn't realize that NOT giving a T to a coach in 10 years, would set me up to be a target on here. Is it really that tough to believe. Do the rest of you have big egos and thin skins or do I have a thick skin or do I have the respect of the coaches? I guess we will never know and I will continue to not give out a T until it is warranted. Thank you for your concern with my reffing career.

[deecee]

Originally Posted by SD Referee

Well I wasn't there...

You can't call a fumble a travel. My argument was to the validity of an intended action and then changing your mind on what you wanted to do and therefore having an unintended consequence. Visa-vie a fumble on what was going to be a pass that then wasn't.

In your case a clear fumble CANNOT be a travel, on any planet.

Also not having a T in 10 years is a big red flag to me. I don't see how one can go 10 games without a T.