Kevin Durant Critique

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by crosscountry55

Agree, Raymond is not wrong. I just think a plain reading of 4-15-2 that says “bats into the air” conjures an image of a player popping a ball ten feet into the air over a defender’s head and then going around him/her and touching it again before it comes down, all in an attempt to evade the defender. What it doesn’t conjure up is the “slight of hand” bat that occurred in the OP video. That’s still a “bat into the air” touched again by the hand(s) before the ball contacts the floor, and therefore an illegal dribble.

I guess some of us are implying that maybe 4-15-2 could be written a little better to help the reader envision the scenario.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Definitely agree the rule should be written better--"dribble ends if the ball is touched by both hands, either simultaneously or separately; dribble ends if the ball is touched twice by the same hand". If someone was implying that before you just explicitly stated it, then they were way too subtle.

I just saw Billy implying their is difference in ruling based upon the ball being touched by both hands simultaneously and both hands separately. I wonder how many illegal dribbles he has allowed based on that differentiation.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Raymond

... difference in ruling based upon the ball being touched by both hands simultaneously and both hands separately.

Different articles. Same ruling. Different rationales. Both illegal. One almost, but didn't, occur in this video.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Different articles. Same ruling. Different rationales. Both illegal. One almost, but didn't, occur in this video.

I asked you why it mattered if it were one or the other that occurred. Don't remember your answer being "it doesn't matter, both result in an illegal dribble".

Again, an example of how your discussions would confuse new officials.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Raymond

What are you double checking and why?

I was double checking because if he did execute a simultaneous two-handed switch (which he didn't) that would be additional rationale for a violation here.

Originally Posted by Raymond

I asked you why it mattered if it were one or the other that occurred. Don't remember your answer being "it doesn't matter, both result in an illegal dribble".

Because I was flummoxed (and concentrating on) by whether, or not, the simultaneous two-handed switch had actually occurred, never actually believing it.

Either your posts, or my posts (or both) were misunderstood.

This post really stymied me.

Originally Posted by Raymond

You had to double check to see if he had two hands on the ball at the same time. How did you not see him switching the ball from one hand to the other?

I thought that your post implied (I was wrong) that you believed that there was a hand to hand two-handed simultaneous switch. To which I responded.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Did he touch the ball with two hands at the same time when the ball was behind his back? Sure, if you say so. You'll get no argument from me.

... never actually believing it.

... and it all went downhill after that.

Were it not for your post, this would have been the last you heard from me about two simultaneous hands.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

The kid, when going behind his back, almost puts two hands on the ball at the same time (had to double check) ...

... a simple statement that there was lots of weird stuff in the video.

The written word, especially when penned by an amateur like me, can sometimes be misunderstood.

Better to orally discuss something over a couple of adult beverages.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Raymond

I asked you why it mattered if it were one or the other that occurred. Don't remember your answer being "it doesn't matter, both result in an illegal dribble".

Found it.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

It doesn't.