Held Ball or Travel?

[so cal lurker]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

A player can "cause" an opponent to not release a shot without ever touching the ball (and not fouling either).

Of course. But irrelevant: the OP said it was the contact on the ball that caused the player not to release. I have trouble picturing a real world play in which that cause exists without also being prevention. But I agree it is impossible to tell without seeing the play. I *suspect* the OP was looking for too much to reach "prevent," but I can do no more than suspect.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by so cal lurker

Of course. But irrelevant: the OP said it was the contact on the ball that caused the player not to release. I have trouble picturing a real world play in which that cause exists without also being prevention. But I agree it is impossible to tell without seeing the play. I *suspect* the OP was looking for too much to reach "prevent," but I can do no more than suspect.

The defender can touch the ball such that the shooter thinks they can no longer easily "make" the shot but could easily shoot it anyway. The shooter chooses not to release the ball. That is causing it without preventing it.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

The defender can touch the ball such that the shooter thinks they can no longer easily "make" the shot but could easily shoot it anyway. The shooter chooses not to release the ball. That is causing it without preventing it.

I'm guessing that's a held ball 99% of the time as called by officials. Wouldn't argue with them either.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Rich

I'm guessing that's a held ball 99% of the time as called by officials. Wouldn't argue with them either.

I wouldn't argue with them since it is certainly a judgement as to whether it was prevented but i hope the officials are applying their judgement using the proper rule instead of an incorrect rule.

[Rob1968]

Case Book 4.44.3 SITUATION A: A1 jumps to try for goal. B1 also jumps and: (b) touches the ball but does not prevent A1 from releasing the ball; RULING: (b) the ball remains live.

The implication is that A1, subsequent to the touching of the ball by B1, did release the ball.

In (c) touches the ball and A1 returns to the floor holding the ball; RULING: in (c), a traveling violation.

Perhaps, we tend to overthink this play, by ignoring the implication in (b).

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Rob1968

Case Book 4.44.3 SITUATION A ...

4.44.3 SITUATION A: A1 jumps to try for goal. B1 also jumps and: (a) slaps the
ball out of A1’s hands; (b) touches the ball but does not prevent A1 from releasing
the ball; (c) touches the ball and A1 returns to the floor holding the ball; or
(d) touches the ball and A1 drops it to the floor and touches it first after it
bounces. RULING: In (a) and (b), the ball remains live. In (c), a traveling violation.
In (d), a violation for starting a dribble with the pivot foot off the floor. Since
the touching did not prevent the pass or try in (b), (c) and (d), the ball remains
live and subsequent action is covered by rules which apply to the situation.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

I wouldn't argue with them since it is certainly a judgement as to whether it was prevented but i hope the officials are applying their judgement using the proper rule instead of an incorrect rule.

I'm going to make the call that fits the situation and the game. I'm not looking to turn a held ball into a travel and I rarely look to make a call where the one bench thinks I'm an idiot and the other feels they got away with something.

Would I call a travel in a very specific situation? Yes. But 99% of the time a player gets a hand on a ball with an airborne player that returns to the floor with it, it's going to be a held ball. And I've never heard anyone argue otherwise......except on the Internet.

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by Rich

And I've never heard anyone argue otherwise......except on the Internet.

You've got good ears...

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Rich

I'm going to make the call that fits the situation and the game. I'm not looking to turn a held ball into a travel and I rarely look to make a call where the one bench thinks I'm an idiot and the other feels they got away with something.

Would I call a travel in a very specific situation? Yes. But 99% of the time a player gets a hand on a ball with an airborne player that returns to the floor with it, it's going to be a held ball. And I've never heard anyone argue otherwise......except on the Internet.

Agree....there is that 1% play, that happens once or twice a year.

[just another ref]

It is not that unusual, particularly at lower levels, for a defender to be in the face of a shooter and not touch the ball at all, and the shooter returns to the floor holding the ball. With this in mind, it's certainly not hard to imagine that a brief touch which would not be a held ball can disconcert the shooter to return to the floor holding the ball.

[RefBob]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

The defender can touch the ball such that the shooter thinks they can no longer easily "make" the shot but could easily shoot it anyway. The shooter chooses not to release the ball. That is causing it without preventing it.

This is exactly what happened. In my opinion, the contact by B1 on the ball kind of took A1 out of their shooting rhythm. The contact kind of made A1 panic (this was a girl's middle school game) and she failed to release. In my opinion, A1 was not prevented from releasing by a "stuff" of the ball by B1.

I agree, that this is a tough call and a tough distinction - especially in a girl's middle school game. But I'm interested in how this would be called in, for example, a boy's varsity game.