Interesting Play

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

There's a difference between being tripped, and tripping.

Originally Posted by Kansas Ref

... the foot, torso or leg ... was there first and was maintained in normal position (no obtrusive extension) ... "Didn't you see that tripping foul?!" ... not tripped, he just tripped on the defender who was already there first ... any player has a right to a spot on the floor provided he gets there first ...

2004-05 NFHS Casebook: 10.6.1 Situation E: B1 attempts to steal the ball from stationary A1 who is holding the ball. B1 misses the ball and falls to the floor. In dribbling away, A1 contacts B1's leg, loses control of the ball and falls to the floor. Ruling: No infraction or foul has occurred and play continues. Unless B1 made an effort to trip or block A1, he/she is entitled to a position on the court even if it is momentarily lying on the floor after falling down.

4-23-1: Guarding is the act of legally placing the body in the path of an offensive opponent ... Every player is entitled to a spot on the playing court provided such player gets there first without illegally contacting an opponent. A player who extends an arm, shoulder, hip or leg into the path of an opponent is not considered to have a legal position if contact occurs.

4-37-3: Every player is entitled to a spot on the playing court, provided the player gets there first without illegally contacting an opponent.

10-7-1: A player must not hold, push, charge, trip or impede the progress of an opponent by extending arm(s), shoulder(s), hip(s) or knee(s), or by bending his/her body into other than a normal position; nor use any rough tactics.

[Kansas Ref]

Regarding the subject/content of the video that originated this Thread: I have a Legal dribble established by the player after recovering the ball, so "no-call". Thanks.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Kansas Ref

I have a Legal dribble ...

I believe that all would agree that the dribble was legal.

After gaining possession of a loose ball with knees on the floor, one can legally start a dribble (and one can then legally continue to dribble and stand up), pass, shoot, or request a timeout.

The debate is about a travel, not about possible illegal dribble. Some believe that the player, preceding the start of the dribble, was attempting to get up, others believe that the player, preceding the start of the dribble, was not attempting to get up.

It's a subjective judgement call.

4-44-5-B: Travel: A player holding the ball: After gaining control while on the floor and touching with other than hand or foot, may not attempt to get up or stand.

4.44.5 SITUATION B: A1 dives for a loose ball and slides after gaining control. A1 is in a position either on his/her back or stomach. What can A1 do without violating? RULING: A1 may pass, shoot, start a dribble or request a time-out. Once A1 has the ball and is no longer sliding, he/she may not roll over. If flat on his/her back, A1 may sit up without violating. Any attempt to get to the feet is traveling unless A1 is dribbling. It is also traveling if A1 puts the ball on the floor, then rises and is first to touch the ball. (4-44-5b)

[Sharpshooternes]

We were debating this tonight. How do you judge rolling over either from the stomach or the back? Is it from stomach to back or back to stomach that is illegal? To the side? So many degrees? We've read and found all of the rules and case book plays previously mentioned but can't conclude about the rolling over part.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Sharpshooternes

We were debating this tonight. How do you judge rolling over either from the stomach or the back? Is it from stomach to back or back to stomach that is illegal? To the side? So many degrees? We've read and found all of the rules and case book plays previously mentioned but can't conclude about the rolling over part.

It's not defined in the books or interps.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Sharpshooternes

How do you judge rolling over either from the stomach or the back? Is it from stomach to back or back to stomach that is illegal? To the side? So many degrees? We've read and found all of the rules and case book plays previously mentioned but can't conclude about the rolling over part.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

What does "roll over" mean? 90 degrees? 180 degrees? 360 degrees? It's a good thing that I carry a protector with the extra whistle in my pocket.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

It's not defined in the books or interps.

... and Funk and Wagnalls weren't very helpful: To turn around, or partly turn around.

Yeah. Thank you Funk. Thank you Wagnalls. For nothing.

[Kansas Ref]

Well regarding whether or not a travel occurs is left to the sagacity of the referee who has primary coverage of the play.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Kansas Ref

Well regarding whether or not a travel occurs is left to the sagacity of the referee who has primary coverage of the play.

Or the umpire, or the other umpire.

Sagacity?

“Don't use a five-dollar word when a fifty-cent word will do.” (Mark Twain)

Samuel Clemens used to live right up the street from me.

I mean, from where I live now.

I'm not that old, but Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. is.

[crosscountry55]

Kansas Ref…..ignore BillyMac’s critique. I, for one, appreciate the profundity of your word selection.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Sharpshooternes

We were debating this tonight. How do you judge rolling over either from the stomach or the back? Is it from stomach to back or back to stomach that is illegal? To the side? So many degrees? We've read and found all of the rules and case book plays previously mentioned but can't conclude about the rolling over part.

It isn't defined, but I'm OK with a player settling from this/her side to back or stomach....about a 1/4 turn. But, I'm not OK with going from left side to right side...anything nearing 180degrees is, to me, turning over.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by crosscountry55

Kansas Ref…..ignore BillyMac’s critique. I, for one, appreciate the profundity of your word selection.

Already sent Kansas Ref a personal message saying the same.

I actually used the word "musings" for the first time in my life on the Forum yesterday. Had to double check the spelling and to make sure it meant what I wanted it to mean. I did not do very well on the vocabulary part of my high school SAT. My English teacher, Mr. Baumgartner, was very disappointed.

Profundity? Really?

[Mike Goodwin]

Sagacious: definition 2 obsolete : keen in sense perception. [merriam-webster.com, accessed 12/29/21]

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Mike Goodwin

Sagacious: definition 2 obsolete : keen in sense perception. [merriam-webster.com, accessed 12/29/21]

Is Mike Goodwin implying that Kansas Ref is obsolete?

[Mike Goodwin]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Is Mike Goodwin implying that Kansas Ref is obsolete?

Nope. Just the word.