Fun With A High Dribble …
 

Note: I posted this video not because it's at all controversial, but rather because this is the first time I've ever heard a distinction made between carrying and palming. I've always known that there were two types of palming/carrying, illegal dribble and traveling, but I've never heard them differentiated by name.

Have fun.

Is this a dribbling violation? Observe the play and make a judgment as to whether or not a dribbling violation is committed.

https://storage.googleapis.com/refqu...z0N1VQj7VR.mp4

Two choices: This is not a dribbling violation. This is a dribbling violation.

My comment: This is not a dribbling violation. Palming, or carrying, is when the ball comes to rest in the dribbler's hand, and the player either travels with the ball, or illegally dribbles a second time. There is no restriction as to how high a player may bounce the ball, provided the dribbler’s hand stays on top of the ball, and the ball does not come to rest in the dribbler’s hand.

Disclaimer: For IAABO Eyes Only. Below is not a NFHS interpretation, it's only an IAABO International interpretation which obviously doesn't mean a hill of beans to most members of this Forum.

IAABO International Play Commentary: Correct Answer: This is not a dribbling violation.

Inconsistent enforcement of palming/carrying rules by officials has led the NFHS to make it a Point of Emphasis for the 2020-21 season. Some of the inconsistency stems from officials ruling some awkward “high” dribbles to be a violation when the dribble was legal. Palming/carrying occurs when a player dribbles a second time after allowing the ball to come to rest in one or both hands. When the ball comes to rest, the dribble has ended. If the ball handler dribbles again, he/she has violated the dribbling rule (4-15-4a, b).

There is a distinct difference between palming and carrying. Palming occurs when a dribbler can maintain their pivot foot, allows the ball to come to rest, and then completes a second dribble. This is an illegal dribble, commonly referred to as a double dribble. (9-5) Carrying occurs when the ball comes to rest while the dribbler moves the pivot foot in excess of prescribed limits. This violation is covered within the traveling rule. (4-44,9-4)

In this play, a dribble momentarily gets away from the dribbler. It happens very quickly, but by rule, is considered an interrupted dribble. (4-15-5) Despite the ball bouncing higher than the previous dribbles, the dribbler is able to regain control by placing a hand on top of the ball and directing it to the floor. Since the ball never came to rest in one or both hands, the dribble did not end. Therefore, the subsequent continuation of the dribble is legal and properly ruled by the officials.

Here is the breakdown of the IAABO members that commented on the video: This is not a dribbling violation 94% (including me); This is a dribbling violation 6%

Either of the moves could result in a travel or illegal dribble.

Carrying/Palming ...
 

Correct. I always knew that there were two ways to palm/carry, an illegal dribble, or a travel. It's just that I never knew that there was a defined difference between a carrying "violation" and a palming "violation". They have always seemed to have been "lumped" together as carrying/palming.

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.

https://www.ducksters.com/sports/bas...f_carrying.jpg

"There is a distinct difference between palming and carrying. Palming occurs when a dribbler can maintain their pivot foot, allows the ball to come to rest, and then completes a second dribble. This is an illegal dribble, commonly referred to as a double dribble. (9-5) Carrying occurs when the ball comes to rest while the dribbler moves the pivot foot in excess of prescribed limits. This violation is covered within the traveling rule. (4-44,9-4)

Hmmm, where have I heard this distinction before between an illegal dribble and a traveling violation?

Learn Something New Every Day. ...
 

We all knew that there was no such "real violation" as carrying or palming. Carrying or palming is not found anywhere in Rule 9 Violations. It was either an illegal dribble, or a travel. The carrying/palming signal was just a communication tool.

So Raymond, and possibly others, knew that "palming" only describes an illegal dribble violation, and that "carrying" only describes a travel violation? And it can't be vice versa?

I must have been absent that day in referee class.

Never heard that before (forty years for me). One really does always learn something new every day.

https://tse1.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP.Y...=0&w=300&h=300

Palming and carrying are simply part of the definition for when the dribble ends when the ball comes to rest in one or both hands. The two terms are only mentioned once in the rules in that context

Stay In Your Lane ???
 

It looks like the IAABO "Gang of Four" co-interpreters have decided to take the NFHS "definition" one step further and differentiate between an illegal dribble palming violation and a traveling carry violation.

I really don't have a big problem with that because it reminds us that there really isn't a palming/carrying "violation", and that the violation is actually either an illegal dribble, or a travel.

The idea of differentiating between the words "palm" and "carry" just surprised me. I've always "lumped" them together, even while fully realizing that there were two "varieties" of palming/carrying.

It's really just a signal to help us to communicate more effectively.

It's pedantry for the sake of pedantry.

Jewish Proverb ...
 

"From your lips to God's ear".

Often in my games when I encounter occurrences that would demand my consideration of the legality of a "high-dribbling action", it is the player/dribbler themselves that stops high-dribbling [despite no whistle] and hands the ball to me---mis-believing they've committed a violation and thereby often precluding my fair adjudication.
Now I must say that I do not then call a traveling violation while said player is politely walking the ball to me for apparently a resumption of play---hey I'm not a monster. Yet I used to at times wonder if I was perpetuating their mis-belief; however, I'm the Referee not their Coach.