Palming (Carrying) Is Just A Signal ...
 

Palming (carrying) is not an actual violation, it is just a signal. Sometimes the actual violation is a travel. Sometimes the actual violation is an illegal dribble.

Here's the only mention of palming (carrying) in the rulebook, it's the only mention anywhere in the rule (not casebook) language.

4-15-4-B: The dribble ends when: The dribbler palms/carries the ball by allowing it to come to rest in one or both hands.

Palming (carrying) is not found anywhere in Rule 9 Violations. It's not a actual violation, it's just a signal.

Palming, or carrying, is when the ball comes to rest in the player's hand, and the player either travels with the ball, or dribbles an illegal second (double) time.

https://tse3.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP.I...=0&w=132&h=131

While almost all officials use the palming (carrying) signal for such a play, it wouldn't be incorrect for an official to use the travel signal for a situation where the violation was an actual travel, or for an official to use the illegal dribble signal for an actual illegal dribble. I've observed many officials use these options. It would be incorrect for an official to use the travel signal for such a play that was actually an illegal dribble, or for an official to use an illegal dribble signal for a play that was actually a travel.

Stupid NFHS ...
 

Got any additional historical information? Timeline? Why removed (probably because it's not an actual violation)? Why, once removed, put back (officials revolt)?

https://tse1.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP.o...=0&w=206&h=174

It Was A Dark And Stormy Night ...
 

4.15.4 SITUATION D: While dribbling: (a) A1 bats the ball over the head of an
opponent, runs around the opponent, bats the ball to the floor and continues to
dribble; RULING: Violation in (a), because the ball was touched twice by A1’s
hand(s) during a dribble, before it touched the floor.

The plot thickens.

Yes, it is strange that palming is in the Violations section of the rule book but not in any written area. Contrastingly, some violations (ball through net from below) are in the written area but not in the Violations section.

Now that is plot thickening.

The word "provided" is in a case about throwing the ball off the opponents backboard...something that looks nothing like a dribble but is declared so anyway. No way anyone could even think it might be a dribble just by the way it looks. Not related to the case we're talking about at all.

You are completely misreading that case. Look at it again.....

"...because the ball was touched twice by A1’s hand(s) during a dribble, before it touched the floor."

You can't just leave out the most relevant part of the case. This case is about a player throwing/batting the ball up in the air, and running to touch it (catch or continue the dribble) before it hits the floor. This case has absolutely nothing to do with the point you're trying to make. The second touch doesn't make it a dribble, it makes the dribble that already started and illegal dribble.

It is the one I am discussing. Do not throw "We" in there.

Your previous argument was that a second touch was not required. You said nothing about the floor. I do not need that part of the case. The relevant part is the one that disputes your claim, the part about the second touch.

You always seem to forget what you said/argued/debated in previous posts. Then it comes out later as "not what I meant" in future posts. Lol, whatever. Stick to what you type and not your thoughts. Last post to you, promise.

You can't take a few words out of a case and completely out of context like that. You might as well cite a case on uniform rules. It would be equally applicable.

Again, this case, since you apparently haven't read it, is about a player, in the middle of a dribble, batting the ball UP and touching it again before it hits the floor....fundamentally and completely different than how a dribble begins.


We have been talking about how a dribble is started and whether it has to be touched again, in general, before it actually is a dribble. I've been 100% consistent on this...in this thread and for years. I have no idea who you're confusing me with.

Your original statement...

That is simply not true, not even close. A player can never start a 2nd dribble after the first (without losing control and the ball being touched by another player).

As I've said over and over, many, including myself in most cases, where it may be ambiguous, wait until that subsequent touch to confirm it was a dribble, but, the dribble itself always begins on the release, not the 2nd touch and was illegal from the very beginning. However, many just wait to the 2nd touch to be certain.

You might like to try to push this off on me but all I'm doing is telling you what the rule actually says. Read it in its entirety and don't leave out half the words which change the entire meaning.

The Oddest Signal ...
 

I just realized that my statement, "Palming, or carrying, is when the ball comes to rest in the player's hand, and the player either travels with the ball, or dribbles an illegal second (double) time", is incorrect.

By rule language, palming can be a legal method of legally ending a dribble, i.e., no violation.

My statement accurately reflects the use of the signal, palming leading to an illegal (double) dribble, or a travel.

Palming may be the oddest signal on the NFHS signal chart.