Fumbled Ball (cont)

[JetMetFan]

Originally Posted by Dad

Read it yourself, my point still stands. When is equipment anything other than something you wear? (NOTE: See the first three bullets below) This is an exception in that you can throw the ball off the backboard and catch it without it being a dribble. You can not throw it off the backboard, take steps, and then catch it.

Originally Posted by Dad

I don't like explaining rules by using rules from another level. I would say it isn't even spelled out slightly. The only conclusion I can come to is throwing it off the backboard isn't a dribble (NOTE: see the red bolded part below). There's no feasible way for me to conclude, in NFHS, that it's okay to start another dribble after throwing it off the backboard.

Either you can throw it off your backboard and take steps/start another dribble, or you can do neither. Any middle ground makes absolutely no sense(to me).

*What players wear (jersey, pants) = Uniform (NF 3-4).

*What players wear (other than jerseys, pants) = Player Equipment (NF 3-5).

*Backboard = Part of the court and its equipment (NF Rule 1).

*Dribble = 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 the ball touches a player's own backboard. (NF 4-15-1)

*NF Case Book Play 4.15.1 SITUATION C:
A1 attempts a pass to A2 during pressing action in A's backcourt. The ball hits B's backboard and deflects directly back to A1 who catches the ball and: (a) passes the ball to A2; or (b) starts a dribble.
RULING: The pass against B's backboard was the start of a dribble which ended when A1 caught the ball. In (a), the pass is legal action. In (b), it is a violation for a second dribble. (4-4-5; 9-5)

I'm far from perfect when it comes to some of my posts but it took me all of five minutes to find these in the rule book. It actually took longer to post them.

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by JetMetFan

*What players wear (jersey, pants) = Uniform (NF 3-4).

*What players wear (other than jerseys, pants) = Player Equipment (NF 3-5).

*Backboard = Part of the court and its equipment (NF Rule 1).

*Dribble = 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 the ball touches a player's own backboard. (NF 4-15-1)

*NF Case Book Play 4.15.1 SITUATION C:
A1 attempts a pass to A2 during pressing action in A's backcourt. The ball hits B's backboard and deflects directly back to A1 who catches the ball and: (a) passes the ball to A2; or (b) starts a dribble.
RULING: The pass against B's backboard was the start of a dribble which ended when A1 caught the ball. In (a), the pass is legal action. In (b), it is a violation for a second dribble. (4-4-5; 9-5)

I'm far from perfect when it comes to some of my posts but it took me all of five minutes to find these in the rule book. It actually took longer to post them.

He's talking about A1 throwing ball off his backboard..not Bs. 9.5 says it is legal...not double dribble etc. what he was/is contending is the offensive player who throws ball (clearly not a try) off his own backboard, cannot take steps to retrieve the ball. He can throw it off his backboard (not a dribble cause his equipment) but if takes steps to get it-travel. I contend that 9.5 is broader than that and allows steps before ball caught. That is the play that is seen..albeit rarely.
Now the rules don't really support the case play but it is there.

[Dad]

Originally Posted by JetMetFan

I'm far from perfect when it comes to some of my posts but it took me all of five minutes to find these in the rule book. It actually took longer to post them.

Your point being what? These don't answer anything. I already stated your bullets, so this isn't any new information. Your assumption on what equipment is or is not is off, but that's just semantics and NFHS's typical use of language.

Bullets aside, for some reason you posted about A throwing off of B's basket. This isn't at all what's being discussed. A throwing off of A's basket is not a dribble.

Edit: I'm inclined to apply the rule with Camron's logic and it's how I've thought it should be written. I just despise how it's not clear in the NFHS rules. You can apply the rule either way and can defend both sides.

[JetMetFan]

Originally Posted by BigCat

He's talking about A1 throwing ball off his backboard..not Bs. 9.5 says it is legal...not double dribble etc. what he was/is contending is the offensive player who throws ball (clearly not a try) off his own backboard, cannot take steps to retrieve the ball. He can throw it off his backboard (not a dribble cause his equipment) but if takes steps to get it-travel. I contend that 9.5 is broader than that and allows steps before ball caught. That is the play that is seen..albeit rarely.
Now the rules don't really support the case play but it is there.

Originally Posted by Dad

Bullets aside, for some reason you posted about A throwing off of B's basket. This isn't at all what's being discussed. A throwing off of A's basket is not a dribble.

Got this all muddled between the hypothetical in the OP and what Dad is arguing. Either way, it doesn't hurt to have a case play from Rule 4 since that's where a dribble is defined but Cat you're right, Rule 9 goes a little more in depth.

Originally Posted by Dad

Your point being what? These don't answer anything. I already stated your bullets, so this isn't any new information. Your assumption on what equipment is or is not is off, but that's just semantics and NFHS's typical use of language.

No assumption has been made to what is/isn't equipment. Rule citations have been provided. There are different types of equipment, player and those things considered part of the court.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by JetMetFan

No assumption has been made to what is/isn't equipment. Rule citations have been provided. There are different types of equipment, player and those things considered part of the court.

If the case play intended to only say it wouldn't be a double dribble, it would have stipulated that it was legal on if the player didn't move. However, it didn't. It is basically giving such a player carte blanche to start over as if he/she had released the ball on a try.

[Dad]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

If the case play intended to only say it wouldn't be a double dribble, it would have stipulated that it was legal on if the player didn't move. However, it didn't. It is basically giving such a player carte blanche to start over as if he/she had released the ball on a try.

I think this is a stretch and interpreting items based around another rule set(NCAA). While I'm not at all saying it's incorrect, I can't get there on paper. The only thing I can know for sure is after picking up your dribble there is a backboard you can pass to yourself off of and one you can't. The rest is manipulating the rules if only going off of what's written in the NFHS rules.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Dad

I think this is a stretch and interpreting items based around another rule set(NCAA). While I'm not at all saying it's incorrect, I can't get there on paper. The only thing I can know for sure is after picking up your dribble there is a backboard you can pass to yourself off of and one you can't. The rest is manipulating the rules if only going off of what's written in the NFHS rules.

Why would it let a player, after ending a dribble, let them throw it off the backboard if he/she was required to remain in the same spot? That would be pretty much useless.

All of the rules came from the same place. The underlying principles and concepts are the same. There are certainly differences but when the rules are the same, short of explicit rulings to the contrary, a reasonable and logical person would and should expect them to have the same interpretations.

[Kansas Ref]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

There are certainly differences but when the rules are the same, short of explicit rulings to the contrary, a reasonable and logical person would and should expect them to have the same interpretations.

*wow you sound like my lawyer

[Dad]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Why would it let a player, after ending a dribble, let them throw it off the backboard if he/she was required to remain in the same spot? That would be pretty much useless.

All of the rules came from the same place. The underlying principles and concepts are the same. There are certainly differences but when the rules are the same, short of explicit rulings to the contrary, a reasonable and logical person would and should expect them to have the same interpretations.

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.