Interesting Play

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Raymond

My logic tells she didn't attempt to stand up because she purposely stopped at the point where she was on her knees, then she started a dribble before successfully standing up. My logic tells me if she were attempting to stand up, she wouldn't have started a new activity after being on her knees, she would have continued doing something that got her on her feet without dribbling the ball.

There is a difference between fact and opinion. The NFHS wording of this rule leads to different interpretations. That is easily remedied by adding a phrase to the rule itself ("acts including rising up on one's knees) or adding a case play that includes the specific act of rising to one's knees or publishing an official interpretation.

The entire travel rule is written to define what is legal and declares anything else as illegal. Since the case play that lists what a player on the ground may do and doesn't mention this as something that is legal, it is not legal. If a player were to rise to the feet, that wouldn't just be an attempt to stand up, it would actually be successfully standing up. If they only wanted a successful or complete attempt to stand to be a violation, it wouldn't say "attempt" in the rule.