interesting boo-boo

[blindzebra]

Originally posted by lrpalmer3

Most definitely!!! I am agreeing with you and Jurassic. Your point is so obvious to me that I refuse to discuss it.

But this case play is confusing because it means that the dribble CONTINUES even when the player goes out of bounds. Someone explain THAT!!!!!

It's called an interrupted dribble.

This case does not prove JR and Rainmaker's point. The difference is that this play COULD be a pass and that pass occurred BEFORE they went OOB.

A toss to save a ball looks very different than a normal dribble. If A1 dribbles and steps out it's a violation right there. If they are dribbling and about to step out and realize it and toss the ball, well that ended the dribble, and on release player control ends. In THIS play if they recover the ball it would be a violation.

You still can't dribble step out and THEN decide to end your dribble.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by lrpalmer3
[/B]

But this case play is confusing because it means that the dribble CONTINUES even when the player goes out of bounds. Someone explain THAT!!!!! [/B][/QUOTE]Luther, it continues as an interrupted dribble, with no player control by the dribbler when he goes OOB. When the player comes back inbounds, he can re-establish player control by either grabbing the ball or dribbling it. Also, the rules state that you can't travel during a dribble- interrupted or otherwise.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by blindzebra

You still can't dribble step out and THEN decide to end your dribble. [/B]

You still CAN legally dribble, then have an interrupted dribble, step OOB during the interrupted dribble, then establish yourself back in bounds and resume your dribble. If you disagree with that, find a rule that will back your opinion up before claiming it as fact.

[blindzebra]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

You still CAN legally dribble, then have an interrupted dribble, step OOB during the interrupted dribble, then establish yourself back in bounds and resume your dribble. If you disagree with that, find a rule that will back your opinion up before claiming it as fact. [/B]

I'm not arguing that and you know it!

Your point is that you need to wait to see if they GIVE UP THE DRIBBLE AFTER THEY STEP OUT.

I've said many, many times that the dribble and/or player control must end BEFORE they step out.

This case play and NOTHING you have said changes that fact.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.
I am joining this thread a little late, and I apologize for my posting go be somewhat on the lengthy side. The play being discussed in this thread can be grouped with two other plays where the logic to determine whether or not a violation has occurred is the same.

Play #1: The play being discussed in this thread.

Play #2: A1 lifts his pivot foot before releasing the ball to start a dribble.

In both of the above plays, A1 has committed a floor violation. A1 has caused the ball to go out-of-bounds in #1, and has committed traveling violation in #2.

The question that is germane to both plays is: When did the violation occur?

This thread has produced two main schools of thought with regard to Play #1: 1) A1 causes the ball to go out-of-bounds as soon as he touches out-of-bounds even though he is not touching the ball when he touches out-of-bounds; or 2) A1 does not cause the ball to go out-of-bounds unless he has out-of-bounds status the next time he touches the ball.

Similar logic can be applied to Play #2. 1) A1 travels when he releases the ball to start a dribble; or 2) A1 travels when he touches the ball after it has rebounded from the floor.

When Dick Schindler was still the NFHS Rules Editor, Play #2 was discussed great length at an IAABO Fall Rules Interpreter's Conference and Dick Schindler took part in the discussion. Many interpreters thought that the then and still current Casebook play was not correct (they took Position #2.). Their reasoning was: The official does not know if A1 is releasing the ball for a dribble or a pass. If A1 does not again touch the ball then he did not start a dribble. The logic for defending this position is the same as defending Position #2 in Play #1.

The casebook play states that A1 has traveled when A1 releases the ball to start his dribble. Dick took Position #1 which is the casebook ruling. One can see from reading both the rules and casebook plays that in Play #1 A1 has committed a out-of-bounds violation as soon as he touched out-of-bounds with his foot and that in Play #2 A1 has committed a traveling violation as soon as he released the ball to start a dribble. It is the position of the Rules Committee that in both Plays #1 and #2, is that the official is not to wait until A1 retouches the ball to for the violation to be called.

Mark, you may have written some funnier gobbledegook than the above, but I can't remember when.

Whatinthehell has play #2 got to do with this thread? Answer- ABSOLUTELY NOTHING!!! There is NO dribble being started anywhere in this thread, and there is absolutely nothing even remotely resembling there being something germane to starting a dribble anywhere in this thread. This whole thread is about something that happened during a dribble. Well, you CAN'T travel during a dribble- interrupted or otherwise.

And please don't use that "it's the position of the Rules Committee" stuff either. You tried that once before on the the penalty for simultaneous fouls, remember, and you looked pretty silly when the Rules Committee issued something the next year didn't agree with you that it should be treated like a false-double foul. If you CAN find something from the Rules Committee that will back up your opinion on this one, I will gladly apologize to you. Until then, please answer like everyone else in this thread- and just give your opinion without trying to say that the Rules Committee actually backs that opinion.

Btw, could you please tell me in the red-highlighted play above, exactly how A1 can travel after he touches the ball when it rebounds from the floor- like you said? Similar logic? We're talking about something that happened DURING a dribble. That's got absolutely nothing to do with something (a travel) that MUST happen BEFORE or AFTER a dribble. Are you really teaching your students that it's possible to travel during a dribble? That's kind of a basic rule to misinterpret, isn't it.

Lah me!

PS- IAABO interpretations don't mean squat either, in case anyone got the wrong idea from that part of your post. Until the NFHS issues a case play specifically addressing this particular sitch, all anybody can do is give their opinion of what the proper way to call this play should be. And until then no one can definitively say that an opposing opinion is definitely wrong.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by blindzebra
[/B]

Your point is that you need to wait to see if they GIVE UP THE DRIBBLE AFTER THEY STEP OUT.

I've said many, many times that the dribble and/or player control must end BEFORE they step out.

This case play and NOTHING you have said changes that fact. [/B][/QUOTE]BZ, I know what you've said. Hell, we've repeated ourselves often enough that we sureashell should understand what the other is saying. The problem with this play is that we are both interpreting the rule in different ways. And neither one is ending up with anything that could really be termed a "fact" in our answers. We're just giving our "opinions" only. Until the FED issues something explicit on this, either one of us could be right. Or wrong. It's that simple.

[lrpalmer3]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

But this case play is confusing because it means that the dribble CONTINUES even when the player goes out of bounds. Someone explain THAT!!!!! [/B]

Luther, it continues as an interrupted dribble, with no player control by the dribbler when he goes OOB. When the player comes back inbounds, he can re-establish player control by either grabbing the ball or dribbling it. Also, the rules state that you can't travel during a dribble- interrupted or otherwise. [/B][/QUOTE]

But how can you call a double dribble after an interrupted dribble in which you lost player control?

[blindzebra]

Originally posted by lrpalmer3

Luther, it continues as an interrupted dribble, with no player control by the dribbler when he goes OOB. When the player comes back inbounds, he can re-establish player control by either grabbing the ball or dribbling it. Also, the rules state that you can't travel during a dribble- interrupted or otherwise. [/B]

But how can you call a double dribble after an interrupted dribble in which you lost player control? [/B][/QUOTE]

In your play player control was lost on the toss, at this point you have a pass. If A1 retrives the ball it becomes an interrupted dribble, since a dribble can begin in several ways by releasing the ball to the floor. If A1 continues the dribble it's okay. If A1 recovers the ball then begins dribbling they double dribble.

In the original play, if A1 was already dribbling and then makes this toss BEFORE going OOB, they can no longer recover the ball. The toss ends the dribble, it does not cause an interrupted dribble, and a recovery would then be a double dribble if the ball bounces or a travel if they catch it in the air.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by blindzebra
[/B]

In the original play, if A1 was already dribbling and then makes this toss BEFORE going OOB, they can no longer recover the ball. The toss ends the dribble, it does not cause an interrupted dribble, and a recovery would then be a double dribble if the ball bounces or a travel if they catch it in the air. [/B][/QUOTE]The dribbler in the original play could no longer recover the ball ONLY if the toss back inbounds was made by two hands, or if the ball came to rest when the ball was tossed back inbounds with one hand. Both of those scenarios caused the original dribble to end. If the dribbler tipped or batted the ball back inbounds, then the original dribble did not end and you do have an interrupted dribble, and you now can legally go back in bounds and resume that dribble, or end it by grabbing the ball or touching it with both hands simultaneously. That's basically what Luther's case play is saying also, only the dribble is being started in the case play by throwing a caught pass back in bounds.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Jurassic Referee:

Lets look at the two plays once more:

Play #1: A1 is dribbling the ball. While dribbling the ball but while not in contact with the ball, A1 steps on the boundary line. RULING: A1 has committed an out-of-bounds violation. Why? A1 is, by definition, in control of the ball while dribbling and there-by caused the ball to go out-of-bounds, the instant he touched the boundary line. As stated before, some people believe that the official should wait to see if A1 is still out-of-bounds the next time he touches the ball during his dribble before ruling this an out-of-bounds violation. But, the ruling that I have given is supported by rule and casebook.

Play #2: A1 lifts his pivot foot before starting pushing the ball to the floor to start his dribble. RULING: A1 has committed a traveling violation. Why? By rule and casebook play this is a travel violation. Once again, as I have stated before, some people believe that the official should wait to see if A1 touches the ball again, thereby confirming that A1's intent was indeed to dribble. But, once again the rules and casebook plays state that it is a traveling violation by A1 the instant he releases the ball after lifting his pivot foot.

In both cases the rules and casebook plays state that there is not waiting for any further action to take place to determine whether or not a violation has occurred.

Regarding Play #2 and the discussion at an IAABO Rules Interpreters Conference: IAABO is an officials association that deals directly with matters that are of concern to basketball officials. It works with the NFHS and many StateHSAA's on matters concerning basketball officiating and basketball rules. There are many other basketball officials associations (BOA's) that do the same, the only difference is that IAABO is the largest basketball officials association in the world. Having said that its interpreters make interpretations just like the interpreters of any other LOA, these interpretations are based upon the rules, casebook plays, and ideology of the rules committee, just as the interpreter of any non-IAABO LBOA should. As I stated in my earlier post, Dick Schindler took a very active part in the discussion and in defending the casebook ruling.

To be perfectly honest, I do not like the casebook play ruling, I agree with the school of thought that the official should wait and see if A1 touches the ball again thereby eliminating any doubt as to whether A1 had really started a dribble. But, I have always applied the rule per the rule and casebook play, and in fact cannot remember a time when a coach complained about the call. When told that the dribbler had lifted his pivot foot before releasing the ball to start the dribble, the coach almost every time got on the player's case about starting his dribble before lifting his pivot foot.

MTD, Sr.

[blindzebra]

Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.
Jurassic Referee:

Lets look at the two plays once more:

Play #1: A1 is dribbling the ball. While dribbling the ball but while not in contact with the ball, A1 steps on the boundary line. RULING: A1 has committed an out-of-bounds violation. Why? A1 is, by definition, in control of the ball while dribbling and there-by caused the ball to go out-of-bounds, the instant he touched the boundary line. As stated before, some people believe that the official should wait to see if A1 is still out-of-bounds the next time he touches the ball during his dribble before ruling this an out-of-bounds violation. But, the ruling that I have given is supported by rule and casebook.

Play #2: A1 lifts his pivot foot before starting pushing the ball to the floor to start his dribble. RULING: A1 has committed a traveling violation. Why? By rule and casebook play this is a travel violation. Once again, as I have stated before, some people believe that the official should wait to see if A1 touches the ball again, thereby confirming that A1's intent was indeed to dribble. But, once again the rules and casebook plays state that it is a traveling violation by A1 the instant he releases the ball after lifting his pivot foot.

In both cases the rules and casebook plays state that there is not waiting for any further action to take place to determine whether or not a violation has occurred.

Regarding Play #2 and the discussion at an IAABO Rules Interpreters Conference: IAABO is an officials association that deals directly with matters that are of concern to basketball officials. It works with the NFHS and many StateHSAA's on matters concerning basketball officiating and basketball rules. There are many other basketball officials associations (BOA's) that do the same, the only difference is that IAABO is the largest basketball officials association in the world. Having said that its interpreters make interpretations just like the interpreters of any other LOA, these interpretations are based upon the rules, casebook plays, and ideology of the rules committee, just as the interpreter of any non-IAABO LBOA should. As I stated in my earlier post, Dick Schindler took a very active part in the discussion and in defending the casebook ruling.

To be perfectly honest, I do not like the casebook play ruling, I agree with the school of thought that the official should wait and see if A1 touches the ball again thereby eliminating any doubt as to whether A1 had really started a dribble. But, I have always applied the rule per the rule and casebook play, and in fact cannot remember a time when a coach complained about the call. When told that the dribbler had lifted his pivot foot before releasing the ball to start the dribble, the coach almost every time got on the player's case about starting his dribble before lifting his pivot foot.

MTD, Sr.

MTD, the key to that case play is A1 got control while in the air. You can't lift a pivot foot until you have one.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Play #1: A1 is dribbling the ball. While dribbling the ball but while not in contact with the ball, A1 steps on the boundary line. RULING: A1 has committed an out-of-bounds violation. Why? A1 is, by definition, in control of the ball while dribbling and there-by caused the ball to go out-of-bounds, the instant he touched the boundary line. As stated before, some people believe that the official should wait to see if A1 is still out-of-bounds the next time he touches the ball during his dribble before ruling this an out-of-bounds violation. But, the ruling that I have given is supported by rule and casebook.

Mark, if you have a rule and a case book play that DEFINITIVELY states that the violation does occur as soon as the player steps OOB, and NOT when he touches the ball next on a continuous dribble, then please cite them. I'm not aware of any such definitive rule or case book plays, and if they do exist, they certainly haven't been cited yet in this thread. If you are gonna cite rules or case book plays that have already been cited by others in this thread, then please go back and read my responses to them. They haven't changed, and won't change, and it would be a waste of time to repeat them again.

Btw, A1, by definition, is NOT in player control of a ball during an interrupted dribble.

[Edited by Jurassic Referee on Sep 22nd, 2004 at 02:33 PM]