I also cannot think straight
 

I'm confused on the "fumble rule" and would love a ruling as I cannot find anything in the HS rule book except the definition and this does not help interpret certain plays.
Play - A1 finishes his dribble, looks to throw the ball to another player but stops his throw as the other player breaks the other way and it fumbles out of A1's hands onto the floor. A1 takes 2 or 3 steps and pick up the all. He does not dribble again, he just picks it up. What is the ruling?

There is nothing in the case book now but I remember from a past case play that if the ref deemed it to be truly a fumble (and not a pass that he goes and gets because the other player broke the other way), he or she may go pick it up because you cannot walk or double dribble when you have no player control.

:confused: What is the ruling?

Illegal dribble. The throw started a dribble so the player cannot be the first to touch. you can fumble-dribble-fumble but you cannot dribble-fumble-dribble.

Trust your memory. Your ruling is correct.

The OP said he made the judgment that this was a fumble and not a pass. So I don't believe this is an illegal dribble.

Agree you cannot dribble-fumble-dribble. But what was described was dribble-fumble-retrieve. That's legal.

You cannot just "fumble" a pass then be the first to touch it. There are allowances for fumbling a ball that is thrown to you and then you pick it up and start a dribble, fumbling a dribble off your foot and recovering the dribble (interrupted dribble), but I don't think you can change your mind on a pass after you end your dribble, let the ball bounce then pick it up without committing a "double" dribble.

The ball hitting the ground was start of a second dribble if touched by the same offensive player. IF there are rule/case plays that prove I'm wrong please cite.

I can't because this is a HTBT kind of play, or we'd at least need to see video to talk about the official's judgment.

I could certainly see a player start a pass, realize his man isn't there, then reach out with the non-throwing hand to stop the throwing motion and secure the ball. And then fumble.

Tiger Woods has been known to check a golf swing mid-stroke. Tennis players sometimes stop a serve post-toss and start over. What's to say a point guard with good reflexes also couldn't stop a passing motion mid-throw?

as long as the ball doesnt leave his hand and hit the floor we are all good.

The OP says the ball was "fumbled" out of his hand. If we are using the RB definition, a fumble is the accidental loss of control so the player may recover without penalty.

Was the loss of the ball a fumble or a pass? If it's a pass, then it's a violation, if it's a fumble they can retrieve the fumble.

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

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 was about to defend Deecee's post, but it was done before I could hit reply.

If you're going to claim nonsense at someone try to at least back it up.

A fumble is the ACCIDENTAl loss of player control when ball unintentionally drops or slips from player's grasp. It is not limited to ending a dribble. In this play if the player starts to pass it to A1 but changes his mine and tries to hold on but ball "drops or slips" unintentionally, it is a fumble. On the other hand, if the player changes his mind and just throws the pass with not much on it, that would be a dribble if he went and got it. The OP said fumble. That word means ball slips. Fumble is a.....fumble. I'd really have to see the play. Fumbles are not limited to ending a dribble. Thx

After 15 years I think I know what a fumble is. In this instance with what was described I would not call this a fumble. Changing your mind on a pass and deciding to try and hold on the ball but the ball still pops out is a pass, albeit crappy one, in my book. I'm not rewarding bad offense or penalizing good defense here.

If you change your mind and try to hold on but ball slips out that is a fumble. If your a coach it's a crap pass by the kid. If your a referee it's a fumble. That's the definition in the book. Ball slips fumble.

You are not answering the OP.

In the OP, it was judged (however crappily) to be a fumble. You are saying that it should almost never be judged to be so.

Thus, the disconnect in the thread.

You're both right.

I don't like ties:). Do you agree that if the ball slips out of my hands, it is a fumble?

Bob, you are correct. If deemed a fumble then perfectly ok.

However I do not subscribe to the described sequence of events as a fumble.

Well, the opening poster deemed it a fumble, so they incorrectly called a violation.

Changing your mind in the middle of the pass and losing control of the ball is not an intentional act of striking the ball or pushing it to the floor. It is called a fumble, by definition, as determined by the rule makers of the game. Unfortunately as you can see below, they have a different definition of what a fumble is than you do (see below). As with most things you comment on here, it seems as though you have been messing this up for 15 years as well.

FUMBLE
A fumble is the accidental loss of player control when the ball unintentionally drops or slips from a player's grasp.
A fumble may be legally recovered by any player

Changing your mind in the middle of a pass and then losing control of the ball is a fumble. Fumbles are not, nor have they ever been limited to losing control of the ball right after stopping your dribble as you insist.

And just to make sure you understand your limited grasp of the English language has prevented you from understanding this rule your entire officiating career, please try on the following case book plays, which in no way fit into your opinion of what a fumble is.

After ending a dribble, A1 leaves the playing court to attempt a try for goal. While airborne, A1 fumbles the ball and:

1. Recovers the fumble while airborne, returns to the floor, and dribbles the ball or
2. Recovers the fumble after returning to the floor and then dribbles the ball.

Ruling: Violation in both 1 and 2. (Next sentence is key, read carefully) A1 is permitted to recover the ball but after recovering the ball is not allowed to start another dribble. If A1 had not previously dribbled the ball, and while airborne fumbled and recovered the ball, he is permitted to start a dribble.


Go ahead and continue not to reward bad offense or penalize good defense, just realize you are doing so based on your personal feelings and opinions and have no rules backing whatsoever.

Apparently not.
When a player does not intended to release the ball but it comes out anyway, that is defined as a fumble. So, what is described in the OP is a fumble, by rule.

The situation you referred to above on receiving a pass is defined as a "muff".

A dribble, as you want to call it, is a deliberate action. Not accidental.

I would have a hard time calling a play like this anything other than a violation. If the ball went far enough away that he had to take several steps to retrieve it, he more than likely voluntarily released the pass.

While muff actually has multiple definitions :D the word doesn't actually appear in the books, does it?

That implies that you're more willing to call what everyone in the gym thinks should be called than to defend a no-call with confident knowledge of Rule 4. This is not good officiating form.

If you judge pass right away, go ahead and call ID in this situation. If you're not sure, to say that you would call a violation anyway based on the fact that it was "more than likely" a pass is guessing. Guessing on calls will not separate you. Ever.

Let's Go To The Videotape ...
 

4.15.1 SITUATION B: A1’s throw-in pass is beyond A2. (a) A2 reaches out and
slaps the ball toward A’s basket; or (b) A2 muffs the pass. In both situations. A2
then gains control and dribbles to the basket and scores. RULING: No violation
in either (a) or (b).

4.44 SITUATION A: A1 attempts to catch the ball while running rapidly. A1
muffs the ball, but succeeds in securing it before it strikes the floor. A1 then
begins a dribble, taking several steps between the time the ball was first touched
until it was caught. RULING: There has been no violation provided A1, after catching
the ball, released the ball to start the dribble before the pivot foot was lifted
from the floor. (4-15)

9.1.1 SITUATION: A1, at the free-throw line to attempt a free throw: (a) muffs
the pass from the official and it rolls forward; or (b) while performing his/her
habitual dribbles prior to the release, accidentally allows the ball to deflect off
his/her foot into the lane. RULING: In (a), the official should sound the whistle to
prevent any violations and then start the free throw procedure again. No freethrow
violation should be called in this situation. In (b), a free-throw violation
shall be called on A1. (9-1-3a, e)

9.2.1 SITUATION B: A1, out of bounds for a designated spot throw-in: (a)
muffs the pass from the official and it rolls forward; or (b) after receiving the ball
from the official, fumbles the ball and leaves the designated spot to retrieve the
fumble. RULING: In (a), the official should sound the whistle to prevent any violations
and then start the throw-in procedure again. No throw-in violation should
be called in this situation. In (b), a throw-in violation shall be called on A1 for
leaving the designated spot.

https://sp.yimg.com/xj/th?id=OIP.M6e...=0&w=300&h=300

There is (at least) one exception to that, I think.

I respectfully disagree. The player began the motion to make a pass, then changes his or her mind and the ball comes out. I am sticking with the original intent of the player that it was a pass attempt. Not my problem that the kid couldn't hold on to the ball. I'm not going to penalize good defense and reward sloppy offense.

Tuck rule? :D

Who knows. I am going to run this by our rules interpreter and get his feedback.

Where is this in rule book? I don't think you should use this as a base for your defense. You should stick to your judgement that it was a pass (and thus a violation) while acknowledging the OP, and others in that sitch, COULD have seen a fumble.

How about poor officiating? Seems that we should take away your next game check so as not to improperly reward that.

That is my way of telling you that you are incorrect on this point.

Anytime that the ball unintentionally slips out of a player's grasp, it is a fumble. The art of officiating is discerning if the action was unintentional or done deliberately. Officials are paid to make those judgment calls. What you have stated (that you are just going to penalize the player for bad offense) is lazy and a failure to fulfill one of the basic tenets of officiating--making an honest assessment of the game action.

Yep, it's judgment. There is nothing in the rule book that shows either side is wrong.

The judgment in the play is deciding on what it is you are seeing. Did the ball SLIP out of his hands when the other player went back door or did the player just "let up" on the pass? (The ball didnt slip, bobble etc.) If you determine that the ball slipped out of his hands judgment is over. The rule (fumble definition) says it is a fumble.

Deecee stated earlier that if a player changes his mind on the pass, tries to hold it, but it still "pops out" he is going with the original intent of the player. "Pops out" here means "slips" to me. Original intent can be helpful in determining what the player was doing but, if the ball slips out, it is a fumble. The OP also said it was a fumble.

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.

I have to agree with this after reading all of the posts. This was mostly like an unintentional release of the ball. Probably not a double dribble if it was a classic muff. I wasn't there to see it.

I think if the ball moves far enough away that steps are taken, a travel call is the way to go.

One thing it's absolutely not is travelling. Yes, you won't get an argument but that's because most people haven't taken time to understand the rules on dribbling and travelling.

If it's not a fumble, then he has pushed the ball to the floor and, if he is the next player to touch the ball, it is a dribble. You cannot travel while dribbling.

The only difference between a bounce pass and a dribble is who touches the ball next.

So he has either fumbled the ball and legally recovered it or he has committed an illegal dribble violation. Which it is depends on whether you judge the release of the ball to be intentional or not.

Found it.

SITUATION 1: A1 is an airborne shooter preparing to release the ball on a shot attempt. Instead of releasing the ball on the try, A1 fumbles the ball (while still in the air) and drops it. A1 then returns to the floor and secures possession of the ball. RULING: Traveling violation. While airborne the bail must be released for a try or pass. (4-43-3a; 9-4)

If you determine the ball slipped out of his hands, you've judged it a fumble. Someone else may judge those same actions were a pass.

Insisting that it's impossible to begin a pass, change one's mind, and then fumble the ball - thus ruling anything remotely like the OP an illegal dribble - is the call of least resistance. It will keep coaches, fans, players off your back... but it won't impress your supervisors should they see this or hear of it.

You decide what kind of official you'd rather be.

I would think that even after 15 years, one can still learn. The day I know everything in any sport is the day I should hang 'em up.

Agree completely. The judgment is deciding if it slipped or not. That was the first thing I mentioned in that post. Once you decide it slipped, judgment is over. it is a fumble. Again, Deecee seem to acknowledge that the ball slipped, "pop out" i think he used, but still said it was a pass. That is where the issue is.

I really thought there was a case study at some point that had an airborne player fumble a ball, recover it, and the ruling was no violation. On vacation for a while, but I'll try to find it when I'm back in town.

NCAA says the opposite in AR 76. Player can recover the ball. Also, had the shooter not dribbled previously, he could have started a dribble after recovering the ball. Whether he regained control of it while airborne or after he lands.

I don't think the play you cited is in case book…Was it at one time or is it an old interp.? thx

My opinion is that in the OP, I need to see something that clearly makes me think the player is not attempting to make a pass. There are a lot of things that can be seen by watching the action of the passer, including the actual release of the ball. Players will generally hold the ball differently when they are trying to not pass the ball compared with when they are going to pass the ball. The hand position can be a key thing to look at on plays like this.

I think we have all seen plays where the ball just slips out of a players hands when they are obviously faking a pass. There is a difference between that and a poorly thrown pass or a pass that goes where it shouldn't.

For me, I need to see that the act of releasing the ball was intentional and deliberate to call a violation on a play like that. In my opinion, the benefit of the doubt always goes to the player. The act is not illegally unless I am 100% sure it is illegal.

Totally incorrect. You can't travel if you don't have possession of the ball.

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?

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.

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.

Thank you.

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

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 ;))

:eek:

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.

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.

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.

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

Knock it off with the personal insults.

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?? :(

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.

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.

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.

I'm not trying to be adversarial, but you seem to be. I'm looking for good discussion and help to become better. Why is it so hard to accept that I haven't given a T to a coach? I have given to players, but not coaches. I guess I just have thicker skin than most. It must not be too big of a red flag in my state.

I'm not going to make any sort of call on this as I wasn't there and have no idea how it really went down. I don't think any of us can give a 100% accurate answer.

Why not? How, under NFHS rules could this possibly be a travel? I just don't see any theoretical basis under which it could be a travel.That's why you get the big bucks, right? To decide if it was a controlled bat that constituted a dribble? DD is certainly a possibility if either (1) the referee determines it was not a fumble, or (2) if the player does something the referee considers a dribble while collecting the ball.Still don't see how it is not necessarily a wrong call. What did the player do that could possibly be a travel?Darn straight its hard to believe. You must have shockingly well behaved coaches or be stunningly lucky to not have a situation in 10 years where a T was clearly warranted. Possible, but really, really hard for many of us to believe based on experience.

I would suggest that many of you grow a thicker skin. Or maybe we just have better behaved coaches in my area?

I guess maybe I need to start handing out T's in order to be accepted?

It's possible that you've had ten years of well behaved coaches who heeded your warnings.

It's possible you just take whatever abuse they want to give you and consider an honor to have thick skin.

Chances are, the truth is somewhere in the middle.

Some are afraid to hand out deserved Ts, and others are too quick to dish them out.

Possible, But Not Probable ...
 

I haven't been to South Carolina, but I have been to Virginia, and North Carolina, and I've found that Southerners are very well mannered, and polite, especially compared to those of us that live in the Northeast. Maybe the basketball coaches are as polite, and well manned, as the rest of the population?

I have no opinion on the number of T's you've given, but it has nothing to do with thick skin as compared to others.

Sent from my SPH-L900 using Tapatalk

Many, many moons ago I stopped refereeing to coach a few years. When I went back to refereeing,(still young age) I was "thick skinned" because I was a coach and understood their frustration at times.

Then I came to realize it wasn't about how much I could tolerate. Rules say coach can't act like a knucklehead. If he does, T. It's just another call. Follow rules. When we let a coach act up repeatedly we are not doing our job. The other coach loses confidence in us. I'm not saying go crazy on Ts but what you can tolerate is not the standard. Good luck

I'm going to say this again. Recovering a fumble is never a travel. You can't travel if you don't have possession of the ball.

4-44-1. Traveling is moving a foot or feet in any direction in excess of prescribed limits while holding the ball.

What if a player picks up their dribble and they conveniently "fumble" the ball towards the hoop, pick it up before the defense (bad defense by the way) and then shoot a layup? No call?

I very well understand the rules and the definitions. It just doesn't seem like a legal basketball move when you are stuck without your dribble. I guess we have to go back to you can fumble-dribble-fumble but you cannot dribble-fumble-dribble.

Fumble is not an intentional act like the one described by you.


I wish I had a cool signature

Impossible.

You're working very hard to justify ignoring the rule.

If they "fumble" the ball, you have judged them to have released it intentionally. It is an illegal dribble when they touch it again. (Not travelling, despite your desire to make the call everyone in the gym wants.)

If they in fact fumble the ball, there is nothing illegal there. It is a no call.

You can't determine whether a release was intentional based on whether it was beneficial to the offense. You have to actually use your judgement.

If it is merely convenient (i.e. fortuitous in time) -- but actually a fumble -- then there is no call to be made; if it is, in the opinion of the referee, deliberately released to look like a fumble, then it is a violation -- but it is not a travelling violation.

You've made a lot of posts in this thread, but still not provided any rules basis on which the play in question could possibly be a traveling violation.

You use your judgment. If you think the fumble was intentional, then it's not a fumble so you can make a call. If you think it's a fumble, there's no call to make.

OK...raises hand and confesses...I did not read every post so my apologies if these have been asked previously.

To those contending this is a pass...have you ever seen a player fake a pass? I have. How do you know that the player INTENDED to pass the ball? Just because it looks like that was the intent? Isn't deception one of the characteristics of a good fake?

As far as I am concerned...the situation in the OP is a fumble and can be recovered by anyone.

Thank you for the response without being a condescending douche like some of these gods of officiating. I look forward to more responses from you and your help in learning more.

We're all (well most of us anyway) here to learn, and sadly I'm not immune to the temptation to be a condescending douche at times. :)

It's an internet hazard. As Spock said, "Constant exposure does result in a certain degree of - contamination."

Intentional Or Accidental ???
 

4-21: A fumble is the accidental loss of player control when the ball unintentionally
drops or slips from a player’s grasp.