Ball Hitting Basket Ring

[bob jenkins]

I know that the ball hitting the opponent's backboard is the same as the ball hitting the court in-bounds (4-4-5). Does that apply when the ball hits the basket?

Play: B1 gets a defensive rebound. B1 attempts a pass to B2 on the opposite side of the court. The ball hits (a) A's backboard, or (b) A's basket (ring), and rebounds directly to B1. B1 then dribbles. Ruling?

In (a) an illegal (double) dribble violation (see 4.15.1 C). In (b) ?????

[SNIPERBBB]

I think the only thing you can have, by the book, is if B1 moved to catch the ball resulting in a travel as in. 4.44.3 C

[Nevadaref]

I would treat the hall striking only the ring the same as if the player merely tossed the ball up into the air and caught it again.
My reasoning for doing such is that the rules book specifies backboard in the passage which states that action constitutes a dribble. As Bob is aware the ring/basket is not mentioned.
Also, the ball does not contact the floor or an official, so we have no rule that covers the described action.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

...see 4.15.1 C ...

4.15.1 SITUATION C: A1 attempts a pass to A2 during pressing action in A’s backcourt. The ball hits B’s backboard and deflects directly back to A1 who catches the ball and: (a) passes the ball to A2; or (b) starts a dribble. RULING: The pass against B’s backboard was the start of a dribble which ended when A1 caught the ball. In (a), the pass is legal action. In (b), it is a violation for a second dribble. (4-4-5; 9-5)

4-4-5: A ball which touches the front faces or edges of the backboard is treated the same as touching the floor inbounds; see also 4-15-1.

4-15-1: It is not a part of a dribble when the ball touches a player’s own backboard.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

... the rules book specifies backboard in the passage which states that action constitutes a dribble ... the ring/basket is not mentioned ... so we have no rule that covers the described action.

Agree. If it's not illegal, it's legal.

Purpose and intent may handle it, but it's a stretch when the casebook play specifically, and only, mentions "backboard".

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

I would treat the hall striking only the ring the same as if the player merely tossed the ball up into the air and caught it again.

4.44.3 SITUATION C: (a) A1 tosses the ball from one hand to the other while keeping his/her pivot foot in contact with the floor; or (b) A1 throws the ball over the head of B1 and then takes several steps before catching it. RULING: Legal in (a), but a traveling violation in (b). In (b), since the ball did not touch the floor, the tossing and subsequent catch is illegal. (9-4)

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

I would treat the hall striking only the ring the same as if the player merely tossed the ball up into the air and caught it again.
My reasoning for doing such is that the rules book specifies backboard in the passage which states that action constitutes a dribble.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Purpose and intent may handle it, but it's a stretch when the casebook play specifically, and only, mentions "backboard".

Those seem to be the two options, I agree.

Would you rule the same if:

Play: A1 dribbles on a breakaway At the FT line,(a) A1 tosses the ball off his own back board, catches the ball in the air and dunks it. (b) Attempts to toss the ball off the backboard, but the ball hits the ring and rebounds to A1 who catches the ball in the air and dunks it.

Ruling: (a) legal. (b) ????

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

A1 dribbles on a breakaway At the FT line ... Attempts to toss the ball off the backboard, but the ball hits the ring and rebounds to A1 who catches the ball in the air and dunks it.

Is bob jenkins's insinuating that this is an additional illegal dribble?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Is bob jenkins's insinuating that this is an additional illegal dribble?

Just noting that all the rulings need to be consistent.

Play: (yes, it's impractical). A1, from the FC, throws the ball off of (a) B's backboard, or (b) The ring attached to B's backboard. The ball rebounds in the air to A2 who is standing the the FC. Ruling: (a) BC violation. (b) ?????

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

A1, from the FC, throws the ball off of ... The ring attached to B's backboard. The ball rebounds in the air to A2 who is standing the the FC.

Here we go again.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

... it's impractical ...

I find that by pushing rules to the limits, one can gain great incite into rules language (if one is not limited by what the NFHS publishes, or doesn't publish).

I'm the one who is often criticized by those who believe that my "twists and turns" in the same thread confuse things.

But it's not the case here.

This thread has a common theme of, "What's the location status of the ring compared to the backboard?", and every situation noted by bob jenkins pushes that point further along.

I find this thread to be fun and educationally invigorating, but we should prepare ourselves to never get any closure here, unless a "Mighty Mouse" shows up to "save the day" with an overlooked rule or casebook play citation (Nevaderef's area of expertise).

Or we may have to end up using "purpose and intent", and that's often very subjective.

And then we may have a problem comparing a "real" game call to a written test question.

[BillyMac]

Just for the young'uns out there. Unlike in football (and probably other sports) where a team defends its own goal, in basketball a team's own basket is the basket it's shooting at.

[billyu2]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Agree. If it's not illegal, it's legal.

Purpose and intent may handle it, but it's a stretch when the casebook play specifically, and only, mentions "backboard".

The casebook play also specifically states "the ball hits B's backboard and bounces directly back to A1." Question: What if the ball hits B's backboard, then the ring and then to A1? Would it be legal for A1 to start a dribble? IMHO if A1 started a dribble I would rule a violation in all three situations (backboard only, backboard+ring, ring only) to be consistent in not giving A1 an unfair advantage not intended by the existing rule.

[SNIPERBBB]

What advantage would A1 get if the ball came straight to him, didnt hit the floor and he didnt move?

[Indianaref]

I would consider the ball striking the ring at the opponents goal the same as hitting an official and then returning to A1.