Questions?

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by ChuckElias

By rule, I really think the ball is dead as soon as A1 touches OOB, which in your scenario is before B1 makes the steal. So the "ugliness" factor of blowing the whistle while B1 is "heading down court for an easy layup" is not a factor in the play.

RULE 9 SECTION 3 OUT OF BOUNDS
A player shall not cause the ball to go out of bounds.
Question - The dribbler steps on or outside a boundary, but does not touch the ball while he or she is out of bounds. Is this a violation? Answer - Yes.

IMO this accounts for the dribbler who alternates a step OOB with the actual touch of the ball during the dribble and does not adress my play at all.

[DownTownTonyBrown]

Although your changes of the scenario were not too subtle... Chuck has again shown the exact point of the rule.

NOTE: The dribbler has committed a violaiton if he/she steps on or outside a boundary, even though he/she is not touching the ball while he/she is out of bounds.

It says nothing about retouching. It says nothing about loosing the ball. It says nothing about interrupted dribble. IT JUST SAYS THE DRIBBLER HAS VIOLATED IF HE STEPS ON A LINE. So the question again is "Is he still a dribbler when he steps on a line - even though he is going to make a decision here in a split second and say "Hey, I don't want to dribble anymore." It is still the same question WAS THIS GUY A DRIBBLER WHEN HE STEPPED ON THE LINE? Obviously, if the answer is YES, then this is a violation.

Now also obviously, these other nitwit scenarios that some of you keep coming up with ... he is no longer a dribbler after B1 has stolen the ball, or after he has slapped it back towards the court and fallen out of bounds, or tripped on his shoelace and fallen on the line as the ball bounces away - even if the wind is blowing from the west and it is a Thursday morning and the other team has Wilt Chamberlin playing. No violation in these scenarios.

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by DownTownTonyBrown

Now also obviously, these other nitwit scenarios that some of you keep coming up with ...

nitwit?

Interesting debating style you have.

BTW, **** you.

[mick]

Originally posted by ChuckElias

No way, mick. A long bounce pass may be the start of a dribble, but it is not necessarily a dribble. If it were, then we would have double dribble violations every time a player ended his dribble and then threw a bounce pass. Your scenario above does not fit the conclusion you want to draw. use maybe, assumed, presumed or imagine, ...not necessarily works, too.

This is obviously an interrupted dribble, which is why the ball is not OOB. The dribbler didn't step out in that scenario. not interrupted because it was intentionally left on the floor

I see your point, I just think it's wrong. Here's the rule Camron posted, and I don't see how there's any real debate about it:

RULE 9 SECTION 3 OUT OF BOUNDS
A player shall not cause the ball to go out of bounds.
Question - The dribbler steps on or outside a boundary, but does not touch the ball while he or she is out of bounds. Is this a violation? Answer - Yes.

Again, my two cents, but I don't see how there can be this much debate about it.

mick

[mick]

Originally posted by DownTownTonyBrown
Now also obviously, these other nitwit scenarios that some of you keep coming up with ... he is no longer a dribbler after B1 has stolen the ball, or after he has slapped it back towards the court and fallen out of bounds, or tripped on his shoelace and fallen on the line as the ball bounces away ...

Interesting commentary.
Thank you for your reply.
I now understand your interpretation.
mick

[DownTownTonyBrown]

And your responses or debating styles are to ignore the question or change the scenario again so that we can eventually come to your answer?

Sorry for the use of the word "nitwit" but the scenarios you guys keep posing have an obvious answer, that I have reiterated again and again. Those are not violations. You are right!

Yet you keep telling me that the only way you would call OOB is if the dribbler retouches the ball. Rule 9-3 tells me the violation has ocurred BEFORE the dribbler retouches or continues to dribble. Maybe I'm using the wrong ear but I haven't heard justification to say the dribbler must retouch the ball before an OOB violation has ocurred.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by ChuckElias
[/B]

I see your point, I just think it's wrong. Here's the rule Camron posted, and I don't see how there's any real debate about it:

RULE 9 SECTION 3 OUT OF BOUNDS
A player shall not cause the ball to go out of bounds.
Question - The dribbler steps on or outside a boundary, but does not touch the ball while he or she is out of bounds. Is this a violation? Answer - Yes.

Again, my two cents, but I don't see how there can be this much debate about it. [/B][/QUOTE]Touching the ball again immediately after being OOB and then coming back in-bounds is the violation,and that is what R9-3 is telling you.If the player NEVER DOES TOUCH THE BALL after stepping OOB, then what particular violation in the rulebook then covers the play? R9-3 doesn't. The player has NEVER caused the ball to go OOB if he ends his dribble by NOT touching the ball again AFTER going OOB.Please find me a rule that says different.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by Dan_ref

nitwit?

Interesting debating style you have.

BTW, **** you.

I'm leaving with Elvis now.

[Camron Rust]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

I see your point, I just think it's wrong. Here's the rule Camron posted, and I don't see how there's any real debate about it:

RULE 9 SECTION 3 OUT OF BOUNDS
A player shall not cause the ball to go out of bounds.
Question - The dribbler steps on or outside a boundary, but does not touch the ball while he or she is out of bounds. Is this a violation? Answer - Yes.

Again, my two cents, but I don't see how there can be this much debate about it. [/B]

Touching the ball again immediately after being OOB and then coming back in-bounds is the violation,and that is what R9-3 is telling you.If the player NEVER DOES TOUCH THE BALL after stepping OOB, then what particular violation in the rulebook then covers the play? R9-3 doesn't. The player has NEVER caused the ball to go OOB if he ends his dribble by NOT touching the ball again AFTER going OOB.Please find me a rule that says different. [/B][/QUOTE]

R9-3Q doesn't mention anything about coming back in and touching it. It says that the instant A1 steps on the line, it is a violation if A1 is a dribbler. If the player choses to end their dribble by not touching it again after touching OOB, it's too late. THey have already violated.

[mick]

Originally posted by Camron Rust
R9-3Q doesn't mention anything about coming back in and touching it. It says that the instant A1 steps on the line, it is a violation if A1 is a dribbler. If the player choses to end their dribble by not touching it again after touching OOB, it's too late. THey have already violated.

None of that stuff is in my book,
...but I can imagine it is.

[SamIAm]

My logic, right or wrong, leads me to think that this rule was written to prevent a player from stepping out of bounds while dribbling, whether the player is out of bounds at the time the player is touching the ball or not.

My view:
A dribble occurs when the ball goes from the hand(s) to the floor and back up to a hand again. If the ball does not return to the hand after bouncing off the floor, I think it is reasonable to determine the dribble ended after the last legal dribble. I would require the player retouch the ball after having stepped OOB to judge the player as still dribbling, then whistle a violation.

[ChuckElias]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee
Touching the ball again immediately after being OOB and then coming back in-bounds is the violation,and that is what R9-3 is telling you.

None of that stuff is in my book. . .
but I can imagine that it is. :shrug:

If the player NEVER DOES TOUCH THE BALL after stepping OOB, then what particular violation in the rulebook then covers the play? R9-3 doesn't.

This is our fundamental difference of opinion. I think the question in 9-3 covers it precisely. That question doesn't ask about what happens when the dribbler touches the ball after being OOB. It asks about what happens when the dribbler steps on the boundary line, without touching the ball.

This is obviously a tomato/tomahto thing, but for the life of me, I can't imagine how.

[DownTownTonyBrown]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee
RULE 9 SECTION 3 OUT OF BOUNDS
A player shall not cause the ball to go out of bounds.
Question - The dribbler steps on or outside a boundary, but does not touch the ball while he or she is out of bounds. Is this a violation? Answer - Yes.

Touching the ball again immediately after being OOB and then coming back in-bounds is the violation,and that is what R9-3 is telling you.If the player NEVER DOES TOUCH THE BALL after stepping OOB, then what particular violation in the rulebook then covers the play? R9-3 doesn't. The player has NEVER caused the ball to go OOB if he ends his dribble by NOT touching the ball again AFTER going OOB.Please find me a rule that says different.

If 9-3 doesn't cover it then nothing in the NFHS rulebook covers it. I feel it is the only thing that covers it.

By what you seem to be saying JR, it would then be okay to be dribbling, step on the line, but don't touch the ball while OOB, let the ball bounce once by itself, place both your feet back in bounds, and essentially start a new dribble - because the previous dribble ended BEFORE you stepped on the line, before you decided to not touch the ball again and allowed the ball to bounce by itself and before you reestablished your position in bounds. Is this okay JR, Dan quadruple star? I would guess that you are not going to allow this. If you did, then there would be no reason for the note.

If you aren't saying the above then I would assume that you are saying that it is the retouching that causes the violation. And I must assume that it is the retouching as a continuation of the dribble that causes the violation (What if he stepped OOB and immediately jumped back in bounds, both feet inbounds on the floor, and caught the ball - thereby stopping the dribble. Is that okay? I again guess that you would not allow that either.) Does that mean there is a rule stating: Violation if you are dribbling, step out of bounds and are the first one to touch the ball after you return to the floor. That's not a rule. Show me that rule. Perhaps you must accept this jump back in and catch the ball scenario as legal. I don't see how you can justify saying that 9-3 is not applicable if you don't.

Aaaaah, I'm fed up with this discussion. It's taxing my brain for a situation I've never seen and probably never will - a player that is quick enough witted to stop his dribble and stand OOB letting his dribble bounce away.

5 pages later! Could have spent my time more wisely. Apologies all around!

[mick]

Originally posted by ChuckElias

None of that stuff is in my book. . .
but I can imagine that it is. :shrug:

[bob jenkins]

Play: Dribbler A1 steps on the OOB line, but doesn't retouch the ball. Despite Coach B's howls, Mick lets play continue and explains A1 wasn't a dribbler unless he retouched the ball.

Late in the game, A leads by 1 with time running out. B1 obtains legal guarding position on dribbler A1. A1 runs into B1, B1 is knocked to the floor and the ball bounces away without being retouched by A1. Mick blows his whistle just as the horn sounds.

Mick reports a player control foul and prepares to leave the court. Coach B says to Mick, "We should shoot FTs -- A1 wasn't a dribbler during the contact since he didn't retouch the ball. Therefore, the foul can't be a PC foul."

Mick responds .... ?