|
|||
Quote:
You also have events that MAY or may NOT be dribbles. It depends on what happens next. If I run to the sideline to save the ball, grab it and drop it to floor inbounds..then my momentum carries me out---the drop of the ball is just a drop of the ball at that moment. If i come back in bounds and touch the ball first, the drop, by rule, at THAT moment, is considered a dribble. If I simply continue pushing the ball down it is legal…play on. If i pick the ball up and then start a standard dribble…i have violated. Double dribble. The stepping on the line stuff applies to the standard dribble or whatever you interpret to be a player in control at the time he steps on the line. When I drop the ball just before my momentum carries me out of bounds we don't know if that is a dribble and we certainly don't think i have control of the ball when i fly out of bounds. I suppose you could consider it an interrupted dribble. If a player has PC and steps on a line-violation. If whatever you see doesn't look like PC-no violation. Last edited by BigCat; Mon Feb 22, 2016 at 10:58am. |
|
|||
Not necessarily. I could purposefully run towards and OOB line knowing I was going to go OOB, leave the ball just before I got there, and, due to my Boltish speed, not be able to stop my momentum before going OOB.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com Commissioner, Portland Basketball Officials Association |
|
|||
Classic accidentally going out of bounds on purpose play, you see Coach K draw it up all the time
|
|
|||
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) |
|
|||
Sigh.
In 195, A1 caught the ball. That establishes control. When he throws the ball to the floor (not "accidentally loses control of the ball) and then touches the ball, that's a dribble. This is true whether (or not) he goes OOB. Any subsequent play is now governed by the rules on "double dribbling." In 141, there was never any control, so never any dribbling. Again, this is true whether (or not) A1 went OOB. Subsequent play is governed by the "recover a fumble" rules -- in other words, it;'s the same as if he had just caught the pass at the spot of the eventual recovery. |
|
|||
Sigh is right. 149 implies that whether A1 had control or not when leaving the court matters when determining whether he can touch when he returns, and it doesn't.
As you say, when a player catches the ball, he is in control. Maybe this will make it easier for you. Let's say team A has ball, and A2 is throwing it on the wing to A1. It is an errant pass, A1 leaves his feet to catch it, while still airborne he secures it with 2 hands, then throws it back onto the court while still in the air. He was clearly in control of the ball precisely when he intentionally throws it back onto the court, he lands out of bounds, he returns inbounds, and is first to touch. That is legal, but 149 certainly implies that a factor in determining whether it is legal is whether he had control of it. He did. Yet my ruling under the books in totality is that he can be the first to touch, despite the inconsistent wording of 149. Now, if when he caught it he had a foot down, then jumps up, in control, throws it back onto the court, and is the first to touch, it's a travel because he lifted his pivot foot before starting a 'dribble'. any problem with that analysis? |
|
|||
Equation ??? I Didn't Know That There Was Going To Be Math On The Forum ...
Is it fair to say that what a player can legally do (regarding traveling and illegal dribble) while 100% on the court is also legal when said player is involved in a legal off/on momentum boundary situation? And that what a player cannot legally do (regarding traveling and illegal dribble) while 100% on the court is also illegal when said player is involved in a legal off/on momentum boundary situation? Can the off/on momentum boundary situation be taken completely out of the equation to simplify the matter? Or am I missing some subtle exceptions?
__________________
"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." (John 3:16) “I was in prison and you came to visit me.” (Matthew 25:36) |
|
|||
Quote:
If the player in 149 had control when he left the court he would be ...OUT OF BOUNDS. That is why it is in there. They are telling you the entire play is legal. He didn't have control when he went out so we don't kill the play at that moment. He can come back in and be first to touch because he didn't leave voluntarily and hadn't dribbled already. Last edited by BigCat; Sat Feb 27, 2016 at 03:22pm. |
|
||||
Quote:
That part only means he can dribble once he returns.
__________________
Sprinkles are for winners. |
|
|||
Quote:
The other replies, thanks I see what you are saying. So in the example I gave above where catching an errant pass while airborne on way OOB, throwing back in and first to touch, he can come back in and essentially RESUME dribbling or catch and NOT dribble any more. |
|
||||
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
Sprinkles are for winners. |
|
|||
Quote:
(I now see that this wasn't the controlled toss play. sorry) Last edited by BigCat; Sat Feb 27, 2016 at 03:57pm. |
Bookmarks |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Running out of Bounds | RangeGunner | Basketball | 14 | Thu Oct 22, 2009 06:22pm |
running out of bounds, screen | lpbreeze | Basketball | 26 | Mon Nov 05, 2007 10:20am |
Out of bounds-running baseline | justshutup | Basketball | 5 | Sat Mar 03, 2007 09:20am |
Running out of bounds | Jimgolf | Basketball | 3 | Wed Apr 27, 2005 10:32pm |
Running Out of bounds | Bizket786 | Basketball | 34 | Mon Oct 25, 2004 12:03pm |