Where is it in the book?

[mick]

Originally posted by BktBallRef

You're looking for stuff that isn't there, mick. These are legal plays.

A player who is dribbling (player control) and steps out of bounds during the dribble, even though he/she is not touching the ball at the time, has violated means that if the dribbler steps on the line between dribbles, it is still a violation. He doesn't have to touch the ball and step on the line at the same time. But this doesn't apply to an interrupted dribble.

If he tosses the ball and it touches the floor, he has started a dribble unless another player recovers the ball. Then we have a pass. If he goes OOB, comes back in and recovers the ball or comes back in and picks up the dribble again, we simply have an interrutped dribble. There is no player control during an interrupted dribble.

Unless the player steps on the line while holding the ball or dribbling it, not an interrupted dribble as described above, he has not violated.

Tony

Interrupted dribble does not have any application in this thread.

[BktBallRef]

Originally posted by mick

Interrupted dribble does not have any application in this thread.

Sure it does.

4-15-5
An interrupted dribble occurs when the ball is loose after deflecting off the dribbler or after it momentarily gets away from the dribbler. There is no player control during an interrupted dribble.

The toss to the floor is considered a dribble, unless another player catches the toss. If A1 doesn't immediately continue the dribble, it is an interrupted dribble. There's no rule that says a player has to bounce the ball so many times before the dribble can be inturrupted.

[mick]

Originally posted by BktBallRef

Sure it does.

4-15-5
An interrupted dribble occurs when the ball is loose after deflecting off the dribbler or after it momentarily gets away from the dribbler. There is no player control during an interrupted dribble.

The toss to the floor is considered a dribble, unless another player catches the toss. If A1 doesn't immediately continue the dribble, it is an interrupted dribble. There's no rule that says a player has to bounce the ball so many times before the dribble can be inturrupted.

And that is all I have to say.
mick

[BktBallRef]

Originally posted by mick

And that is all I have to say.
mick

Yeah, but it doesn't matter which hand you start the dribble with.

[Hawks Coach]

If I am dribbling, lose control and step out of bounds, then step back in bounds and regain control or pick up the ball, I have an interrupted dribble, but it is still an OOB violation per 9-3. If I catch the ball and toss it down to the court while I step out of bounds, I have either passed or I have started a dribble. If a teammate gets the ball, it is a pass. If I step back in and dribble the ball or pick it up, it was an interrupted dribble just as in my original situation and I still have a violation per 9-3.

[BktBallRef]

Originally posted by Hawks Coach
If I am dribbling, lose control and step out of bounds, then step back in bounds and regain control or pick up the ball, I have an interrupted dribble, but it is still an OOB violation per 9-3. If I catch the ball and toss it down to the court while I step out of bounds, I have either passed or I have started a dribble. If a teammate gets the ball, it is a pass. If I step back in and dribble the ball or pick it up, it was an interrupted dribble just as in my original situation and I still have a violation per 9-3.

I'm afraid not coach. Neither of your plays is a violation of 9-3. 9-3 says A player shall not cause the ball to go out of bounds. At what point did the ball go OOB? You are correct that this is an interrupted dribble. During a normal dribble there is player control. That's why the ball is OOB if you're dribbling and step on the line, even if you don't touch the ball while OOB. But there is no player control during an interrupted dribble. Therefore, there can't be an OOB violation unless the player is touching OOB when he touches the ball or he bats it OOB.

[Hawks Coach]

BBR - are you saying that my first situation is not a correct reading of 9-3? Say that I dribble the ball, step on the line, the ball takes another bounce while I get back in bounds, and then I continue my dribble with both feet inbounds. Is this not a violation under 9-3?

[BktBallRef]

Originally posted by Hawks Coach
BBR - are you saying that my first situation is not a correct reading of 9-3? Say that I dribble the ball, step on the line, the ball takes another bounce while I get back in bounds, and then I continue my dribble with both feet inbounds. Is this not a violation under 9-3?

That's exactly what I'm saying. This is an interrupted dribble. You don't even have to have both feet back inbounds. If one foot is in and the other foot is in the air when you pick up the dribble, it would be a legal play. However, it would probably be difficult to pull off.

Had you continued the dribble without the interruption, then we have a violation of 9-3.

Or if touching the line and dribbling the ball were so close that the official thought that you may have been in control when you stepped OOB, it would be a violation. It doesn't take long for a ball to leave the hand, hit the floor and return to the hand, so it's realistic that the violation would occur prior to the interrupted dribble. But after the interrupted dribble legally occurs, you can return inbounds and retrieve it.

[bob jenkins]

Originally posted by Hawks Coach
BBR - are you saying that my first situation is not a correct reading of 9-3? Say that I dribble the ball, step on the line, the ball takes another bounce while I get back in bounds, and then I continue my dribble with both feet inbounds. Is this not a violation under 9-3?

The rule (case, actually) used to say this. The NFHS revised it a few years ago ('97-'98) when it was noted that there is no player control during an interrupted dribble.

The Note in 9-3 clarifies that during a dribble (not an interrupted dribble) it is a violation to touch the line because there is player control.

I would add that if I thought that allowing the ball to bounce twice was just part of the player's dribble (as sometimes happens), then it would be a violation to step on the line. If what happend is that the ball "got away from the player", then it's an interrupted dribble, and no violation. Determionin dribble or interrupted dribble is the official's judgment.

[BktBallRef]

Determionin?

[mick]

Originally posted by bob jenkins

The rule (case, actually) used to say this. The NFHS revised it a few years ago ('97-'98) when it was noted that there is no player control during an interrupted dribble.

The Note in 9-3 clarifies that during a dribble (not an interrupted dribble) it is a violation to touch the line because there is player control.

I would add that if I thought that allowing the ball to bounce twice was just part of the player's dribble (as sometimes happens), then it would be a violation to step on the line. If what happend is that the ball "got away from the player", then it's an interrupted dribble, and no violation. Determionin dribble or interrupted dribble is the official's judgment.

That's right! And running away from a dribble is not an interrupted dribble, by spirit, intent or definition.

[Todd VandenAkker]

Originally posted by bob jenkins
I would add that if I thought that allowing the ball to bounce twice was just part of the player's dribble (as sometimes happens), then it would be a violation to step on the line. If what happend is that the ball "got away from the player", then it's an interrupted dribble, and no violation. Determining dribble or interrupted dribble is the official's judgment.

I think that's the key--deciding if it really was an interrupted dribble or not. In HawksCoach's situation, stepping OOB and letting the ball bounce a couple times before continuing the dribble would be a violation, in my opinion, because it was not a matter of the ball getting away from the dribbler. Now if, as in my original post, the player's momentum causes him to INVOLUNTARILY leave the floor (not just as a result of "zigging" during a dribble, losing his balance, and touching the line), then I believe that would be an interrupted dribble or just a loose ball--no violation when he comes back in a touches the ball.

[Edited by Todd VandenAkker on Jan 23rd, 2001 at 09:39 AM]

[mick]

Originally posted by Todd VandenAkker
Hypotheticals:

1) A1 leaps from inbounds, gains control of the ball while in the air (from a pass), then tosses the ball into the court before momentum carries him OOB. He quickly returns to the court, and is the first to touch the ball again.

Mr. VandenAkker,
When a player leaps OOB, that is a voluntary act.
He did not fall or trip.
That is no different from stepping out voluntarily.

[Todd VandenAkker]

Originally posted by mick
Mr. VandenAkker,
When a player leaps OOB, that is a voluntary act.
He did not fall or trip.
That is no different from stepping out voluntarily.

"Mr. VandenAkker"? Mick, you must be getting serious now. Anyway, it's not voluntary when, to save an errant pass, he leaps to get the ball, manages to keep it on the court, then "flies" OOB. It is, as far as I can see, VERY different from stepping out voluntarily. Also, this play is specifically taken off the NFHS web site and described as a legal play (in case you were thinking it was a violation).

[mick]

Originally posted by Todd VandenAkker

"Mr. VandenAkker"? Mick, you must be getting serious now. Anyway, it's not voluntary when, to save an errant pass, he leaps to get the ball, manages to keep it on the court, then "flies" OOB. It is, as far as I can see, VERY different from stepping out voluntarily. Also, this play is specifically taken off the NFHS web site and described as a legal play (in case you were thinking it was a violation).

Todd,
I concede!!!!!
I just read Situation 10.
I found that what you say is proper according to interpretaion.
In spite of my disagreement with that ruling, that will be my call from now on.
Thanks. I am smarter than I was.
mick