Fun With The Division Line ...

[JRutledge]

For the record, I am not making a statement about the end of a dribble. I am saying the contact with the ball is with a player in the frontcourt and then goes into the backcourt. I was never stating that the dribble ended per se. Just stating that the ball reached frontcourt status and then goes into the backcourt. Call it a fumble if it makes you feel better, but this to me is not that complicated, and is this the intent of the rule to worry about if a dribble ended. Some situations are not covered ball the rule or every interpretation. Kind of like the backcourt situation I saw in the West Virginia-Gonzaga rule and Art Hyland clearly told me in an email that the rules did not cover the situation specifically seen in that game. They had to add an interpretation to deal with the intent of the rule. I think this is one of these situations where there might be a hole in how you define the issue. But again my contention has nothing to do with the end of a dribble.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

For the record, I am not making a statement about the end of a dribble ... has nothing to do with the end of a dribble.

Only the end of the dribble would exclude 4-4-6 from being in full force in this situation. As long as Red #40 is dribbling (he continued to dribble, by definition, throughout the entire play), he must dribble onto the frontcourt to gain frontcourt status, and since the ball was never was dribbled onto the frontcourt, this is a legal play.

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I think this is one of these situations where there might be a hole in how you define the issue.

Like JRutledge, I once thought that this was NFHS "oversight", but once I came across the definition of ending a dribble, it was confirmed for me that an interrupted dribble was, indeed, part of a dribble, and thus this was a legal 4-4-6 play.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

For the purpose of this rule, is an interrupted dribble still a dribble?

Originally Posted by Raymond

Good question. Time for you and Mark to dig deep into some research.

[JRutledge]

Well again the issue is not for me whether the dribble ended. This is not an issue of losing a dribble. This is an issue of the status of the ball. If you dribble off your leg while in the FC, the ball has reached FC status. The rest is about last and first touches in the FC as it relates to a BC violation.

And we are not going to solve this by the discussion here. So you can stop repeating the dribble rule because that is not why I think this is a violation.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

This is an issue of the status of the ball. If you dribble off your leg while in the FC, the ball has reached FC status.

Not according to this specific (backcourt to frontcourt dribble) situation and Article 6 of the Ball Location Rule.

Let's turn away from a dribble definition (I believe that we can now all agree that the dribble, even if interrupted, never ended) and look at "status" rules.

JRutledge himself correctly states that "this is an issue of the status of the ball", so let's take at close look at "status" rules.

JRutledge can point to Article 2 and Article 4 to make his interpretation, but if, and only if, if he totally and completely ignores Article 6.

Rule 4 - Section 4 - Ball Location
ART. 2 A ball which is in contact with a player or with the court is in the frontcourt if neither the ball nor the player is touching the backcourt.
ART. 4 A ball which touches a player … is the same as the ball touching the floor at that individual’s location.
ART. 6 During a dribble from backcourt to frontcourt, the ball is in the frontcourt when the ball and both feet of the dribbler touch the court entirely in the frontcourt.

I believe that the NFHS views Article 6 as a "three points dribble exception" to Article 2 and Article 4, that certainly can't be ignored, and certainly should not be ignored.

Put simply:

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

I believe this is a legal play. The ball was being dribbled from the backcourt and to obtain frontcourt status the ball itself must touch the floor in the frontcourt (along with the feet). The ball never bounced on the floor, thus, the ball was never in the frontcourt. As such, there can't be a backcourt violation.

And, of course, we can't be sure if the ball actually did deflect off the player's leg, body, etc., so that component is purely academic.

If one is not sure, don't call it.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

And, of course, we can't be sure if the ball actually did deflect off the player's leg, body, etc., so that component is purely academic.

So, for sake of argument, let's assume for a moment that there was no deflection (interrupted dribble), that Red #40 simply dribbled the ball "backward".

Wouldn't JRutledge argue that this was also a "status/ball location" issue and that by Red #40 touching the ball while he was standing with both feet in the frontcourt that the ball had gained frontcourt status, also pointing to Article 2 and Article 4 as proof?

I don't see how a backcourt to frontcourt "deflection/fumble/interrupted" dribble in the frontcourt is any different than a "regular" garden variety backcourt to frontcourt dribble in the frontcourt. In both cases Article 6 (three points dribble exception) applies.

[BillyMac]

Situations are slightly unclear, but the ruling is as clear as a bell:

2000-01 NFHS Basketball Rules Interpretations

SITUATION 1: Al is straddling the division line after catching and possessing a pass from A2. Al then fumbles the ball …

SITUATION 2: Same situation as above, except Al begins a dribble immediately upon fumbling the ball and retreats to his/her backcourt to avoid a defender.

RULING: During a dribble from backcourt to frontcourt, the ball is in the frontcourt when the ball and both feet of the dribbler touch the court entirely in the frontcourt. Therefore, the play is legal and play continues. COMMENT: The provision of, “both feet and the ball being in the frontcourt” to determine frontcourt status, is only relevant during a dribble from backcourt to frontcourt.

"Only relevant during a dribble" is why knowing the definition of a dribble, and knowing when the dribble ends, is so important to this video interpretation (and sealed the deal for me).

Originally Posted by JRutledge

... has nothing to do with the end of a dribble.

Yes it does. If the dribble had ended (it never ended), the 4-4-6 three point dribble exception wouldn't apply.

[Raymond]

What happens if dribbler A1:

1) establishes both feet in the FC
2) has not yet bounced the ball in the FC
3) pushes the ball towards the floor

at which point the ball hits the back of A2's heel, who also has both feet in the FC, and the ball lands in the BC, then:

4) A1 retrieves the ball in the BC by continuing his dribble.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Yes it does. If the dribble had ended (it never ended), the 4-4-6 three point dribble exception wouldn't apply.

Again it is not about the dribble if the ball gained status by you touching the ball (not on a clean dribble) and all parts of you are in the FC. Again you are giving your opinion and I am happy for that, but that is just that an opinion. AGain you are focusing on the dribble and I have a player basically bobble the ball while standing in the FC, that is also an opinion. I would suggest if this is an issue, ask the people in your organization what they think. I will ask those I work with what they think. I would not be surprised if we get differing answers. I am OK with that in unusual situations, which in many ways this is.

Peace