|
Sun Nov 16, 2003, 07:05pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Mick,
If A2 touches the ball BEFORE A1 steps OOB, then it is clear and I agree with you. However, as the play was described above A1 steps OOB before A2 comes and gets the ball. I think that the official is required to use his judgment in this case to determine whether A1 still had control or not. 
|
|
Sun Nov 16, 2003, 07:23pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
Sun Nov 16, 2003, 10:09pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
There are is just one question. Did A2 touch the ball and end the dribble before A1 stepped out? As you said, the dribble ended when A2 touched it. If A1 went OOB before the touch, it's a violation, as there was not an interrupted dribble and the dribble still existed. If not, play on.
|
|
Sun Nov 16, 2003, 11:27pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
When A1 went out-of-bounds he was no longer dribbling.
|
|
Mon Nov 17, 2003, 12:27am
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
Mon Nov 17, 2003, 01:37am
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Quote:
 Mick, the orginal scenario didn't say he batted the ball. You have added to the original scenario. I can see your point but the dribbler would have had to obviously get rid of the dribble before he stepped OOB - either passed or obviously pushed the ball away from himself before he stepped out. Then as Tony said Hmmm okay.
__________________
"There are no superstar calls. We don't root for certain teams. We don't cheat. But sometimes we just miss calls." - Joe Crawford
|
|
Mon Nov 17, 2003, 03:03am
|
|||
|
|||
|
interrupted dribble
4-15-5 An interrupted dribble occurs......after (the ball)
momentarily gets away from the dribbler. The key here as I see it is the word away. There is no certain distance necessary. In this case the ball gets away because the dribbler allows it to do so in order to avoid a violation.
__________________
I swear, Gus, you'd argue with a possum. It'd be easier than arguing with you, Woodrow. Lonesome Dove
|
|
Mon Nov 17, 2003, 08:31am
|
|||
|
|||
|
If the dribbler allows the ball to get away because he has steppted on the line, that implies he is in control at the time he steps on the line. It is a violation. Now a smart dribbler will probably avoid an OOB call more that 50% of the time by letting the ball go, but if the only reason he doesn't touch the ball again is because he is on the line, the violation has already occurred.
|
|
Mon Nov 17, 2003, 09:14am
|
|||
|
|||
|
The question does not indicate that an interrupted dribble occurred prior to A1 stepping OOB. Violation.
I'm sure we have the original poster quite connfused by now. 
|
|
Mon Nov 17, 2003, 09:36am
|
|||
|
|||
|
Not that it matters ...
I am with Mick on this one.
The dribbler made a decision to end the dribble by not touching the ball after the last dribble BEFORE going OOB. That is obvious. Now, you who want to call a violation are saying the dribbler made the decision not to dribble after stepping on the oob line and those who don't want to call a violation can say the dribbler made that decision before stepping on the oob line (he/she could see it coming). Since when do we call violations based on what a player is thinking? We have to call the game based on what happened. Last touch by A1 was legal, in bounds. A1 goes oob. A1 knows he/she can't continue the dribble and so does not touch the ball. A2 grabs ball. Sounds legal to me.
|
|
Mon Nov 17, 2003, 10:10am
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Not that it matters ...
Quote:
If the dribbler makes a choice to abondon his dribble first (by passing the ball or batting it away from himself) and then steps out of bounds, this is okay - no violation. But again, recognizing that you have stepped OOB and therefore, now, discontinue the dribble... is too late. The violation has already ocurred at the time the line was stepped on. Not much to disagree with unless it is the first statement I made above. And I think that one is pretty well supported by the rules.
__________________
"There are no superstar calls. We don't root for certain teams. We don't cheat. But sometimes we just miss calls." - Joe Crawford
|
|
Mon Nov 17, 2003, 10:15am
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
A one-handed bounce pass, off the dribble, is the same action. Is there a further definition or qualification for that act to be a dribble or to be a pass? No. Saving a ball near a line by batting the ball to a teammate and then stepping out-of-bounds may be construed as dribbling, or as passing ??? Are we gonna call a violation on a player because we unilaterally considered the act as being a dribble, because it meets the definition of a start of a dribble? For consistency, such an action should not be a violation when someone else touches the ball next. mick
|
|
Mon Nov 17, 2003, 10:22am
|
|||
|
|||
|
mick
You obiviously have to see this one. But if you have a dribbler who is taking normal dribble, and the last push looked like every other push, it was a dribble not a pass. In that case, subsequently stepping on the line is a violation. This is true even if the dribbler then takes the abnormal action of avoiding contact with the ball for a subsequent dribble. Essentially, you have to look at this play and ask yourself what the first "different" action was. If the player pushed the ball away in a different direction in anticipation of stepping on the line, it is an interrupted dribble or potentially a pass. If the player dribbled normally and their first abnormal act was avoiding the ball as it bounced up because he was already OOB, it is a violation because he was still dribbling when he stepped on the line, and only stopped when he avoided the ball after stepping on the line. In the end, you can call this either way and be right, because it truly depends on what you see.
|
|
Mon Nov 17, 2003, 10:27am
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Re: Not that it matters ...
Quote:
Way, way to arbitrary! Would you then verbalize such a reason to his coach, or just do it telepathically?  mick
|
|
Mon Nov 17, 2003, 10:34am
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
"...Different action"? ..."Abnormal act"? I don't have that page. mick
|
 |
| Bookmarks |
|
|
Linear Mode
