Travelling/sitting

[bucky]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Is this the only time that a player will travel and will not be holding the ball?

From the Misunderstand Rules List: A player must be holding the ball (with one very rare exception) in order to travel.

Just checking. I'm about to post an updated List.

This has been discussed. Holding or touching? I believe, can't recall what consensus was, there is the possibility with shooter losing control and then touching. Also, NFHS case 4.44.2 Sit C. Player throws ball over defender and catches it. Instead of catching (ruled a travel in case book), wouldn't it also be a travel just for touching the ball? If so, that would be an example of someone not holding it. ??

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

From the Misunderstand Rules List: A player must be holding the ball (with one very rare exception) in order to travel.

Originally Posted by bucky

Player throws ball over defender and catches it. Instead of catching (ruled a travel in case book), wouldn't it also be a travel just for touching the ball? If so, that would be an example of someone not holding it?

Just touching instead of catching (holding)? Sounds like a travel and is yet another example of someone traveling without not holding the ball.

I will change my List to read: A player must be holding the ball (with rare exceptions) in order to travel.

Thanks.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Just touching instead of catching (holding)? Sounds like a travel and is yet another example of someone traveling without not holding the ball.

I will change my List to read: A player must be holding the ball (with rare exceptions) in order to travel.

Thanks.

That case has been discussed before. At one time, the case play declared it an illegal dribble. By rule, that is more correct than calling it a travel since traveling does indeed required the ball to be held while moving the feet (still with one exception). There is no exception needed to call it an illegal dribble (for not letting it hit the floor).

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

That case has been discussed before. At one time, the case play declared it an illegal dribble. By rule, that is more correct than calling it a travel since traveling does indeed required the ball to be held while moving the feet (still with one exception). There is no exception needed to call it an illegal dribble (for not letting it hit the floor).

Thanks.

I will change my List to read: A player must be holding the ball (with rare exception) in order to travel (changing "exception" from plural to singular).

Note: It's nice to know that a few Forum members actually read my very numerous posts. I will admit that sometimes I post things that are self serving, the posts help me understand things, or remind me of things. As a retired teacher, I know that scientific studies substantiate that the physical act of writing (and possibly typing, or keyboarding) boosts learning. That's why I always had my students take notes in class every day, even if the material was in the textbook. This method may not have helped all of them to learn (there are so many different learning styles) but it definitely helped many of them to learn and to achieve success in my classroom.

[bucky]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Thanks.

I will change my List to read: A player must be holding the ball (with rare exception) in order to travel (changing "exception" from plural to singular).

Note: It's nice to know that a few Forum members actually read my very numerous posts. I will admit that sometimes I post things that are self serving, the posts help me understand things, or remind me of things. As a retired teacher, I know that scientific studies substantiate that the physical act of writing (and possibly typing, or keyboarding) boosts learning. That's why I always had my students take notes in class every day, even if the material was in the textbook. This method may not have helped all of them to learn (there are so many different learning styles) but it definitely helped many of them to learn and to achieve success in my classroom.

Also consider case 4.44.3 SIT A letter d. With the touch (note, not a hold/catch), there is a traveling violation. FYI -

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by bucky

Also consider case 4.44.3 SIT A letter d. With the touch (note, not a hold/catch), there is a traveling violation.

4.44.3 SITUATION A: A1 jumps to try for goal. B1 also jumps and touches the ball and A1 drops it to the floor and touches it first after it bounces. RULING: a violation for starting a dribble with the pivot foot off the floor.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

It is also traveling if A1 puts the ball on the floor, then rises and is first to touch the ball. (4-44-5b)

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Is this the only time that a player will travel and will not be holding the ball?

Originally Posted by bucky

Also consider case 4.44.3 SIT A letter d. With the touch (note, not a hold/catch), there is a traveling violation. FYI -

Originally Posted by BillyMac

4.44.3 SITUATION A: A1 jumps to try for goal. B1 also jumps and touches the ball and A1 drops it to the floor and touches it first after it bounces. RULING: a violation for starting a dribble with the pivot foot off the floor.

A1 is holding the ball when he lifts his pivot foot to start a dribble and thus travels. The touch just identifies this act as a dribble rather than a bounce pass.

[bucky]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Just touching instead of catching (holding)? Sounds like a travel and is yet another example of someone traveling without not holding the ball.

I will change my List to read: A player must be holding the ball (with rare exceptions) in order to travel.

Thanks.

I would change the word "holding" to "controlling." Consider walking down the floor while continuously controlling the ball by tipping/tapping it in the air over and over. This controlled tipping/tapping would be traveling imo but yet the ball is not being held. I prefer the word controlled. Just my 2 cents.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by bucky

I would change the word "holding" to "controlling." Consider walking down the floor while continuously controlling the ball by tipping/tapping it in the air over and over. This controlled tipping/tapping would be traveling imo but yet the ball is not being held. i prefer the word controlled. Just my 2 cents.

Incorrect. Holding is the correct word. What you described is an illegal dribble.

Rule 4-15 DRIBBLE:

ART. 2 . . . During a dribble the ball may be batted into the air provided it is permitted to strike the floor before the ball is touched again with the hand(s).

Since it isn't allowed to hit the floor, that makes it an illegal dribble.

If "controlling" were what made it a travel, a normal dribble would then be a travel.

[bucky]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Incorrect. Holding is the correct word. What you described is an illegal dribble.

Rule 4-15 DRIBBLE:


Since it isn't allowed to hit the floor, that makes it an illegal dribble.

If "controlling" were what made it a travel, a normal dribble would then be a travel.

The case play (throwing over an opponent) is ruled traveling. It even notes "...since the ball did not touch the floor.."The case play contradicts what you indicated. I could be convinced otherwise, but for now, I am sticking with controlling.

Either way, no one would bat an eye about calling a violation.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by bucky

Either way, no one would bat an eye about calling a violation.

I'm intellectually intrigued by carrying/palming violations. There's an official NFHS signal for carrying/palming listed under violation signals, yet there is no definition of a carrying/palming violation in NFHS Rule 4, there is no such violation described in NFHS Rule 9, nor is such a violation mentioned in the Casebook.

All we've got is a signal, and an oral history of the violation communicated by old grizzled veteran officials sitting around a campfire, eating beans and farting.

My personal description of carrying/palming is when the ball comes to rest in a player's hand, and the player either travels with the ball, or illegally dribbles a second time, but I'm not a NFHS Rules Editor, nor do I play one on television.

Even absent a definition or description, as United States Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart said in 1964, "I know it when I see it" (a expression by which one attempts to categorize an observable event, although the category lacks clearly defined parameters), so I do use the signal.

I guess that we could technically do without a carrying/palming signal, instead using the travel signal, or the illegal dribble signal, where appropriate.

I often wonder why a signal with no such violation?

[DrPete]

Palming/carrying does show up in Rule 4.15.4.b
ART. 4

The dribble ends when:

b. The dribbler palms/carries the ball by allowing it to come to rest in one or both hands.

There may not be a clear definition of it, but the description is almost self explanatory. And the mechanic signal depicts exactly what happened. I guess you could also say it's a double dribble, since the carrying action is nothing unless they push the ball to the floor again, hence the dribble ended on the palming, then another dribble.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

All we've got is a signal, and an oral history of the violation communicated by old grizzled veteran officials sitting around a campfire, eating beans and farting.

That's Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. in the right foreground, in the maroon shirt, with his back to us.

[bucky]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

, there is no such violation described in NFHS Rule 9, nor is such a violation mentioned in the Casebook.

It is "mentioned" in case 4.15.4 Sit A, although the rule cited is 9-5 (illegal dribble)

I often wonder why a signal with no such violation?

If the NFHS removed the carrying/palming signal from the book, it wouldn't be the end of the world, in all cases we could use either the travel signal, or the illegal (double) dribble signal, to communicate the specific violation.

To call it traveling, you need to make it a special exception to the travel rule which is defined as moving the feet while holding the ball. To call it an illegal dribble requires no exception to what the rule says....it fits naturally.

People tend to rely too much on actual definitions. The NFHS is not perfect in their editing and often times displays signs of contradiction or inconsistency. We do not have to solely rely on the rule book as items such as the case book, POEs, interpretations, etc. all add meaning. Example: The definition of dribble basically includes the ball striking/hitting the floor and no mention is made of an opponent's backboard or an official. But yet, case 4.15.4 Sit C tells us that throwing the ball against the opponent's backboard or an official constitutes a dribble.

I feel that the palming signal communicates more clearly what exactly happened. Traveling is generally the act of moving a pivot foot outside the prescribed limits. We see this all the time, with few exceptions, and players are generally moving. An illegal dribble is, generally, the act of performing a second dribble after the first has ended. We see this frequently too and players are generally not moving or at least trying not to move. People tend to understand the two signals (traveling/illegal dribble) when these general acts occur. Palming is in the middle. Players, generally, are moving, but yet a pivot foot is not what officials/people see. If you gave a traveling signal, many would say "he was dribbling!" If you gave an illegal dribble signal, many would say "he never picked up his dribble!" Now, when you give the palming signal, no one generally, argues because they realize what you are communicating and the illegal act. It (palming signal) is a communication tool, nothing much more.

Indeed, I think it should be defined as a violation (although it seems to be defined indirectly with the aforementioned case), even though it may not technically be necessary. Maybe just add it under the definition of traveling or illegal dribble. How about (and this is not perfect but just provides an example):

Section 5 ILLEGAL DRIBBLE/PALM/CARRY
"A player shall not palm/carry the ball or a player may not dribble a second time after his/her first dribble has ended, ..."

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by bucky

The case play (throwing over an opponent) is ruled traveling. It even notes "...since the ball did not touch the floor.."The case play contradicts what you indicated. I could be convinced otherwise, but for now, I am sticking with controlling.

Either way, no one would bat an eye about calling a violation.

It does. But it hasn't always. Go back a few years and that very same case play is called illegal dribble. It was changed to traveling without an explanation. Several here were puzzled by the change. However, since the result is unchanged no matter what we call it, it really isn't an issue what we call it.

To call it traveling, you need to make it a special exception to the travel rule which is defined as moving the feet while holding the ball. To call it an illegal dribble requires no exception to what the rule says....it fits naturally.