Quote:
Originally posted by Back In The Saddle
Quote:
Originally posted by blindzebra
There was nothing in BITS origional post that said the dribble ENDED or that the dribbler contacted the ball with both hands before it retouched the floor.
If you read "muff" as attempting to end a dibble, then you have a dribble-fumble-dribble situation, and an illegal dribble.
I read it as a dribbler under control splits defenders and loses their dribble and attempts to regain control, and that is an interrupted dribble.
We need more detailed info from BITS.
|
I guess I misused the word muff. She was dribbling, lost control of it, and was attempting to regain control. In process or regaining control she touched it with one hand, followed by the other hand (but not both at the same time) then was able to continue her dribble. The ball did not come to rest at any point. There was no attempt to end her dribble.
|
I think this makes it easy - no call. Dribble, interrupted dribble, then dribble. Since the dribble never ended, there can't be a double-dribble violation. But I'll bet you heard it from the other coach and the fans. I still think this goes to the issue of control. If you feel the touching of the ball has some element of control, i.e. batting it away from an opponent or towards a teammate so they can eventually pick it up, than yes, it's a violation. But just touching it, even more than once, without having control, does not constitute a violation.
Thu Feb 17, 2005, 04:52pm
Threaded Mode
