Dribble ...

[bucky]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

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.

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

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.

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.