Player Position

[Tom Cook]

Last night, in an 8th grade girls game A1 was dribbling in the corner. In an attempt to go around B1, A1 loses control of the ball, steps out-of-bounds, returns inbounds(foot touched the floor before hand touched the ball) and resumes her dribble. No foul on B1, contact was minimal. No other player touched the ball during the interupted dribble. My partner called a violation, saying that A1, after stepping out of bounds could not be the first player to touch the ball, even after re-establishing her position in-bounds. Was this the right call? I can't defend it in the rule book. Help will be appreciated!!

[mcdanrd]

Don't have my rule book with me but if I recall, and I usually don't, a player with control of the ball can not go out of bounds to avoid the defense and then be the first to gain control when returning in-bounds. A player, not in control of the ball, could go out of bounds to save the ball and be the first gain control when returning in-bounds. I think your partner made the right call on this particular play.

[Bradley Batt]

Your partner was incorrect.

A player can return from OOB and be the first to touch the ball provided he is not touching anywhere OOB. That is, as long as he is touching inbounds and is not touching OOB, he is legal.

A player may not jump from OOB and touch the ball in the air - that is considered OOB. However, there is no requirement to "establish" two feet as some officials think - merely one foot or another part of your body will suffice.

Also, during a dribble, a player may not step OOB even while the ball is not touching their hands. This is considered OOB. Since this was an interupted dribble, thus, no player control, this does not apply.

[mcdanrd]

Like I said earlier, i do not have my books with me but I do happen to have a copy of Part II of the NFHS 2000-01 Basketball Rules Examination. Question 67 address this issue. Question 67 is as follows: "A1 may be out of bounds without penalty if A1, while dribbling, goes out of bounds to avoid B1 and then comes back inbounds to continue the dribble." I did not note the rule reference, but I did note that I answered this correctly and the correct answer is False.

[BigDave]

Originally posted by Bradley Batt
A player can return from OOB and be the first to touch the ball provided he is not touching anywhere OOB. That is, as long as he is touching inbounds and is not touching OOB, he is legal.

I'm gonna go out on a limb and disagree with you, Brad. Since the player had control before going OOB, I believe this is a violation. If I'm wrong, I owe you a soda.

Someone please post the rule reference to either validate my opinion or prove I'm a dumbass.

[winston robinson]

I remember somewhere in my ref ed. class hearing that you may 'fumble-dribble-fumble', but you may not, 'dribble-fumble-dribble', this would be a violation. So to go OOB after dribbling then re-enter the boundary to re-establish your dribble would be a violation. I agree with your partner "Violation"

[bob jenkins]

Originally posted by BigDave

I'm gonna go out on a limb and disagree with you, Brad. Since the player had control before going OOB, I believe this is a violation. If I'm wrong, I owe you a soda.

Someone please post the rule reference to either validate my opinion or prove I'm a dumbass.

It's only a violation if the player has control while being out of bounds. This can only happen on a non-interrupted dribble. That's the meaning of the note in 9-3.

A few years ago it was also a violation if it was an interrupted dribble (as in this case). The NFHS recognized the error and removed the case play (4.15.5) from the book. You can find this in the '97-98 rule book, revised interpretations, play 31 (page 9).

[Danvrapp]

Play: Al blocks a pass near the end line. The ball falls to the floor inbounds, but A1, who is off balance, steps off the court. A1 returns inbounds, secures control of the ball and dribbles. Ruling: Legal.

Hope this helps!

[Richard Ogg]

The key is if A1 loses control of the ball or not. If control is really lost (e.g., ball bounces off of foot) then it is legal. If the player simply goes OOB and returns to be the first to touch the ball, then OOB. It doesn't matter how many times the ball bounces, the issue is if the player is in control or not.

[bob jenkins]

Originally posted by Richard Ogg
The key is if A1 loses control of the ball or not. If control is really lost (e.g., ball bounces off of foot) then it is legal. If the player simply goes OOB and returns to be the first to touch the ball, then OOB. It doesn't matter how many times the ball bounces, the issue is if the player is in control or not.

If the player is in control, then the player (by definition) must either be holding or dribbling the ball. Either way, it's a violation as soon as that player touches OOB. Returning to the court, being the first to touch, etc. are irrelevant in this situation.

[BktBallRef]

Bob and Brad are correct. You can't call this a violation guys, no matter how much you don't like it. You know, it hasn't been but a week or two ago that we discussed this play. The topic was, "Where is it in the book?" and the link is http://www.officialforum.com/thread/1537

Originally posted by Richard Ogg
The key is if A1 loses control of the ball or not. If control is really lost (e.g., ball bounces off of foot) then it is legal. If the player simply goes OOB and returns to be the first to touch the ball, then OOB. It doesn't matter how many times the ball bounces, the issue is if the player is in control or not.

You can't change the rules to read like you want them to. An interrupted dribble doesn't have to go off someone's foot for the dribbler to lose control. If the ball momentarily gets away from the dribbler, you have an interrupted dribble and there is no player control.

Originally posted by winston robinson
I remember somewhere in my ref ed. class hearing that you may 'fumble-dribble-fumble', but you may not, 'dribble-fumble-dribble', this would be a violation. So to go OOB after dribbling then re-enter the boundary to re-establish your dribble would be a violation. I agree with your partner "Violation"

You are correct about "dribble, fumble, dribble" but there's no fumble in this play. This is "dribble, interrupted dribble, dribble" and it's perfectly legal.

4-21
A fumble is the accidental loss of player control when the ball unintentionally drops or slips from a player's grasp.

Originally posted by BigDave
I'm gonna go out on a limb and disagree with you, Brad. Since the player had control before going OOB, I believe this is a violation. If I'm wrong, I owe you a soda.

Someone please post the rule reference to either validate my opinion or prove I'm a dumbass.

You owe Brad a soda. The rules regarding a player going OOB and then returning are covered under 7-1-1 and 7.1.1. They don't specifically address an interrupted dribble but they do address player control. And as you know, there is no player control during an ID.

Originally posted by mcdanrd
Like I said earlier, i do not have my books with me but I do happen to have a copy of Part II of the NFHS 2000-01 Basketball Rules Examination. Question 67 address this issue. Question 67 is as follows: "A1 may be out of bounds without penalty if A1, while dribbling, goes out of bounds to avoid B1 and then comes back inbounds to continue the dribble." I did not note the rule reference, but I did note that I answered this correctly and the correct answer is False.

I'm glad you got the question correct but that's a different play. There's no loss of player control in the NF exam question. There was loss of PC in the original post. The rule reference for #67 is pasted below.

9-3 Note
A player shall not cause the ball to go out of bounds.
NOTE: The dribbler has committed a violation 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.

SUMMARY

As long as he doesn't have control of it when he steps OOB, the play is legal. The fact that he had player control prior to going OOB has absolutely nothing to do with it.

We're making this so much harder than it is. Unless he is dribbling when he touches the line, or steps on the line while holding or touching the ball, the ball is not OOB.

The ball is not OOB if there is an interrupted dribble and the player goes OOB.

You can't decide that it's not an interrupted dribble because you don't like the way the play looked. Whether the ball accidentally gets away from him or he lets it get away, it's still an interrupted dribble.

Whether he went OOB voluntarily or involuntarily has nothing to do with it. The only issue to consider with regards to this is whether he intentionally went OOB to deceive or gain an advantage.

Isn't this fun?

[DanIvey]

Excellent job of explaining this situation Basketball Ref!
Thank you!

[ScottParks]

Great explanation of dribble interruptus. Thanks

[Richard Ogg]

Are you guys saying that a player who is dribbling the ball, then steps OOB while the ball bounces twice, then steps back in bounds had lost control of the ball? How do you define "ball gets away from him"?

The original post states "loses control of the ball" and that makes it easy - no violation.

The tough call is when there is nothing apparent to indicate loss of control (except the ball bounced twice). What about the player who sees the defenser coming and pushes the ball ahead on purpose, goes OOB to get around the defense, and then once inbounds continues the dribble? Did he lose control by purposely pushing it ahead and letting it bounce 2 or 3 times?

Seems this is one of those situations that each person pictures in their mind differently. Show a video and it is easier to argue.

(BTW, "e.g." means for example, not the only explanation.)

[BktBallRef]

Originally posted by Richard Ogg
Are you guys saying that a player who is dribbling the ball, then steps OOB while the ball bounces twice, then steps back in bounds had lost control of the ball? How do you define "ball gets away from him"?

Yep!

The original post states "loses control of the ball" and that makes it easy - no violation.

The tough call is when there is nothing apparent to indicate loss of control (except the ball bounced twice). What about the player who sees the defenser coming and pushes the ball ahead on purpose, goes OOB to get around the defense, and then once inbounds continues the dribble? Did he lose control by purposely pushing it ahead and letting it bounce 2 or 3 times?

First, let me ask, how many times have you seen a player do this?

Now, in the play that you described above, there is no OOB violation. You can't make it into one, no matter how badly you may want to. It doesn't matter if he intentionally lost control or not. It's simply not a violation. However, you could have a technical foul on this play if you feel the dribbler intentionally went OOB to gain an advantage.

Player control, in my opinion would end if the ball bounced up and returned to the floor without the dribbler touching it. Even if he only misses one dribble, it's an interrupted dribble. It may be the world's shortest ID, but I don't believe you can say that the ball must bounce 2 or 3 or 4 times before it's an ID.