A1 picks up his dribble on the wing and has ball over head. Attempts obvious pass to post player on the block. Ball sails over posts head, hits side of backboard. Comes back out to wing. A1 takes a couple steps and retrieves untouched ball.

A. Would this be an illegal dribble? - see 4.15.4(E)
B. If A is not illegal, can he dribble again?
C. What if A1 did not move, ball came straight back?

A. No
B. Yes
C. It doesn't matter

Where was B1?

B1 was between A1 and A2 (post player).

Looks like B1 got caught off guard. Should've expected the bad pass from A1. :) Either way, once it hits the backboard in a player's front court, it's considered a shot even if it wasn't.

Can you provide reference in rule book that indicates it is a shot. I'm new and can't find anything that would indicate that it is a shot, other than board postings that say it is.

Here's the trick. Find something that indicates it's not a shot. I don't approach the rules looking for them to allow something before I allow it. If the rules don't forbid something (by spirit or letter), I allow it for the most part. My rule book is at work, but I'll look it up tomorrow for you.

To me it was obviously not a shot. I was a two-handed pass from over the head that just sailed on the kid. The rule for a shot clearly states the officials judgement is that the player is attempting to throw for goal. If I throw it off the backboard and catch it where I stand I can see where I wouldn't call anything. However, if ball hits court it seem to me it violates rule 9-5-3. If I catch it in the air, have I not changed my pivot foot (assuming I take a couple steps to catch it).

Case play for 4.15.4 indicates throwing off oponents backboard starts a dribble. It's still really unclear what happens if, in officials judgement, it is not a try for goal and thrown at own backboard what the call would be.

You are right that it is not a shot.

However, it is treated as if it were a shot for the purposes of player control....they can retrieve it and start a new dribble.

4.15.4 SITUATION C: After dribbling and coming to a stop, A1 throws the ball: (a) against the opponent' s backboard and catches the rebound; (c) against his/her own backboard, catches the rebound and dribbles again. Ruling: A1 has violated in both (a) and (b). Throwing the ball against the opponent' s backboard or an official constitutes another dribble, provided A1 is first to touch the ball after it strikes the official or the board. In (c), the action is legal as a player' s own backboard is treated the same as touching the floor inbounds, but does not constitute a part of a dribble. (9-5)


The only way for part C to be true is for it to be treated as if it were a try (even though it's not a try). Can you think of ANY other reason where a player can dribble twice without another player touching the ball? I can't.

If A1 is fouled during this act, it's still not a shooting foul nor is it subject to goaltending.

Camron - my only guess is that the NF wants to take the subjectivity out of whether is was a try or not by treating it as if it automatically was - the same way they now rule that any ball that goes in that teams basket that was thrown from behind the 3 point line counts as 3 points, even if it was obvious that it was meant as a pass.

As to not calling a shooting foul or goaltending, that might be a hard sell because of the "not a dribble" ruling.

Another thought
 

tjchamp

Don't go looking for trouble.

I agree with Mark P. that this falls into the area of subjectivity and I am generously going to give the benefit of the doubt to the "shot taker." I think the majority of us (Warning: that is a blanket statement :D) would treat this as a shot attempt and let the play continue.

How about the hot dog who has a breakaway and obviously tosses it to himself off the board and dunks the ball?

Allowed. That specific play (absent the phrase "hot dog", of course) is in the NCAA book. The rule is the same in both codes.