This one should be simple.....

[Nevadaref]

Originally posted by SamIAm
You mentioned one, another one I thought of is: Player A with the ball tosses it up in the air, judged to not be a shot, just above his/her head, takes a step (moves both feet) and catches the ball without the ball touching the floor.

This is the same play that spurred my original comment to which you objected. Again, this play is NOT a travel. It is an illegal dribble. Case Book play 4.15.4 Situation E part(b) specifically says so.

Originally posted by SamIAm
On the side, you can't travel without having had position of the ball first, which is what I think you meant.

Nope. I truly meant that a player cannot travel without HOLDING the ball AT THE TIME of the foot movement. Except for that one sentence in case book play 4.43.5 Situation B, which I believe is a poor interpretation by the NFHS.

4-43 "Traveling (running with the ball) is moving a foot or feet in any direction in excess of prescribed limits while holding the ball."

[SamIAm]

Originally posted by Nevadaref

This is the same play that spurred my original comment to which you objected. Again, this play is NOT a travel. It is an illegal dribble. Case Book play 4.15.4 Situation E part(b) specifically says so.

Nope. I truly meant that a player cannot travel without HOLDING the ball AT THE TIME of the foot movement. Except for that one sentence in case book play 4.43.5 Situation B, which I believe is a poor interpretation by the NFHS.

4-43 "Traveling (running with the ball) is moving a foot or feet in any direction in excess of prescribed limits while holding the ball."

You are correct. There are not a couple of ways to travel without the ball, only one. I also agree that does not seem logical to term the one exception as a travel. It seems just as illogical to me to call the scenario I descibed as an illegal dribble. If you do the same thing and don't move your feet it is legal, you move your feet, it is illegal, but not a travel.

[Nevadaref]

Originally posted by SamIAm

You are correct. There are not a couple of ways to travel without the ball, only one. I also agree that does not seem logical to term the one exception as a travel. It seems just as illogical to me to call the scenario I descibed as an illegal dribble. If you do the same thing and don't move your feet it is legal, you move your feet, it is illegal, but not a travel.

Thanks for being so cordial in your response. I hope you added to your officiating knowledge. Hopefully, my posts never came across as being nasty either. I merely wished to set you and any others who read this thread straight on the rule.
Additionally, while I see your point about the foot movement, there is a good reason that the rule must be this way. Consider a player who throws the ball a few feet away, but allows it to BOUNCE on the floor, before running over to it, and is the first to touch/catch it. This would be a legal play. This is because this action meets the definition of a dribble (4-15). So all you have is a player taking a dribble, and since traveling is not possible during a dribble (4-15-4 Note 1), it doesn't matter how far the player moved from the original location. (Of course, this assumes that the player hadn't dribbled before because then this would be a double dribble violation.)

In fact, this play was included in the interpretations last year and is still posted on the nfhs website:
SITUATION 6: A1 jumps from the floor and secures a defensive re-bound. A1 then pivots toward the sideline where a teammate, A2, is standing for an outlet pass. Just as A1 releases the pass, A2 turns and runs down the court. A1 throws a soft bounce pass to where A2 was standing. A1 then moves and secures the ball without dribbling. RULING: Legal action. A1 had the pivot foot on the floor and began a dribble by throwing the ball to the floor (the bounce pass); the dribble ended when A1 secured the ball. Upon reaching the ball, A1 also could have continued the dribble. (4-15-3,4)

Hope all of this helped to clarify things for you.