*wow you sound like my lawyer

[QUOTE=requintero;986287]9.5.3 of the NFHS Case Book seems to cover some aspects of your (A) hypothetical. A1 is dribbling and ends the dribble. A1 attempts a pass and (in 9.5.3 of the Case Book) the ball hits B1. A1 can recover the loose ball and dribble again. There is no violation because A1's pass was touched by or touched another player (Rule 9-5-3). (This would be the same result even if the ball had been first touched by A2.) If B1 had not touched the ball (your scenario), then if A1 recovered the ball and started a new dribble, this would be a Rule 9-5 illegal dribble violation. (Also see Case Book 7.1.1 Situation D.) If A1 recovered the ball without it first having been touched by another player, but DID NOT dribble again, then there is no violation. Or if A1 gets to the ball and (if possible) immediately starts dribbling it, then there is also no violation. (See Case Book 7.1.1 Situation D.)

It seems to me that Case Book 7.1.1 D is referring to a player who had not been dribbling, and then ended the dribble, before attempting a pass. However, the scenario being discussed is regarding a player who had dribbled, and had ended the dribble, before attempting a pass. Thus, in this case, recovery of the attempted pass, constitutes a second dribble, if the player is the first to touch or recover, the ball, and upon being first to touch the ball, a violation has occurred.

Case book

4.15.4 C

After dribbling and coming to a stop, A1 throws the ball: (a) against the opponent's backboard and catches the rebound; (b) against an official, immediately recovers the ball and dribbles again; or (c) against his/her own backboard in an attempt to score (try), catches the rebound and dribbles again.

RULING: A1 has violated in both (a) and (b). Throwing the ball against the opponent's backboard or an official constitutes another dribble, provided A1 is the first to touch the ball after it strikes the official or the board. In (c), the action is legal. Once the ball is released on the try, there is no player or team control, therefore, A1 can recover the rebound and begin a dribble.

You may not throw it off either backboard and retrieve it. Since you can't have a "try" at the opponents basket, it will always be a violation. If the throw at your own goal is considered a try it is legal.

I never thought usefulness was the point. I read it within the context: look at the other two objects/people getting hit. All three made me think the case play was talking about accidental hits. So if A1 is trying to pass to A2 after picking up his/her dribble, it's a violation if they throw it off the opponent's backboard or official and are the then are the first to touch it. If it's off your own backboard and you catch it then it's not a violation.


The case play is talking about what is or is not a dribble. Not what you can or can't do after throwing the ball off your own backboard. The rules state when you're allowed to dribble a second time.

Actually, that is the point of the case play.

No, it's not. 9.5.1 and 9.5.3 both talk about being able to dribble again. The only thing 9.5 states is after coming to a stop throwing the ball off your own backboard and catching it isn't counted as a dribble. Absolutely nothing about being able to run to retrieve it or dribble again.

Your only real evidence is an NCAA case play, which isn't good enough for me. It's talking about 5-1.1 which is an attempt at a shot. So yes you're allowed to run after an attempt at a shot and then dunk it. Two completely different plays. One is talking about catching an attempted shot and the other is not.

At least look at the rules 9.5 is referencing. There's nothing about an attempt at a shot. If you were correct they would have referenced fundamental 2, not fundamental 19:

A ball which touches the front face or edges of the backboard is treated the same as touching the floor inbounds, except that when the ball touches the thrower's backboard, it does not constitute a part of a dribble.

The college play is a shot. The HS play is not talking about a shot. I'm not seeing any "logical" way to connect the two.

This says that after coming to a stop, throwing (not attempting a shot) a ball against your own backboard constitutes a new dribble. One can reasonably infer that if it isn't a shot it is not legal, even if it explicitly doesn't say that word for word.

What you highlighted and what you said are contradicting each other. Am I missing something?

In an attempt to score (try)

If you shoot the ball off your own backboard in an attempt to score, then it is legal. You cant just throw it off the backboard and retrieve it. It must be considered a try for goal.

I agree with this.

Really?:confused:

You said (not attempting a shot) but the case book play says "in an attempt to score(try)"

This is one of the stupidest arguments on here to date. The assumption that one would throw the ball of ANY backboard and NOT move their feet is completely absurd. For all intensive purposes a player throwing the ball towards their basket/backboard is a shot attempt in my book. I'm not intelligent enough to read into every "may", "deem" or officials "point of view" in the rule book. I work with my limitations and just call it like I see it.

Ball towards basket = shot attempt.

This I agree with.

However it is our job to judge intent, and simply throwing a ball against a backboard doesn't mean its a shot.