Dribble ...

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by bucky

Can't believe I am doing this...sigh. You are incorrect. The word "provided" in the case I cited indicates that the violation can't occur without the second touch.

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.

Originally Posted by bucky

Even 4.15.4 Sit D indicates the second touch is required with the words "..because the ball was touched twice..."

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.