Dribbler is moving through traffic and loses control of the ball briefly (muffs it). In trying to get control she bats it with her right hand then with her left hand before she's able to get it under control to continue dribbling. So, she dribbles, muffs it, touches it with her right hand, then her left hand, then continues dribbling. I no-called it. Did I miss a double dribble, or was I correct?

That one's tough. If the original muff is off of a two-hand touch, I think you need to call this a double dribble, at least at the JV/Var level. In ms you could probably let her have three or even four uncontrolled touches. But even at the upper level, I don't think I'd always call it.

If the original fumble was not a two-hand thing, and there's no two-hand touch on any of the recovery touches, then you should have nothing, except props for great playing!

This isn't a fumble, unless you think the player was trying to end her dribble by catching the ball and has the ball slip from her grasp.

It's a violation to touch the ball with one hand then the other during a dribble. I'd rule this play a double dribble.

Remember, you can fumble, dribble, fumble but not dribble, fumble, dribble. In this case, it looks as though the player dribbled, "touches it with her right hand, then her left hand"(assuming the ball is in the air at this point), then dribbled again. I've got a double dribble.
Now if the ball was tipped out by a defender or off of a defender, whole different story there. . .

It's not a fumble, it's an interrupted dribble.

A fumble is accidentally dropping the ball during a catch or when ENDING a dribble.

If the player is dribbling and lose control of the dribble it is not a fumble.

A double dribble violation is basically: dribble-possesion-another dribble. A muff doesn't constitue possesion, but possesion can be with one hand or two. If A1 dribbles, loses control, picks it up with both hands (possesion), then starts to dribble - it's a violation. If A1 dribbles, muffs, then starts dribbling again without actually picking it up, there's nothing. If you felt the battting of either hand was under control rather than trying and failing to get the ball, you could have the violation.

One of my pet peeves, however, is calling a violation on something that just looks bad. If a player muffs the ball, is un-coordinated enough to not be able to pick it up right away, and three or four steps are taken in the process, many officials still call the violation (travel, double dribble, whatever). Everyone in the gym will nod their head in agreement with the call, but it would be a wrong call. The same pet peeve holds for the "high dribble" violation.

Interrupted dribble.

Try again. If A1 dribbles, muffs, then starts dribbling again, it's a double dribble. The muff ended the dribble when both hands touched the ball or the ball came to rest in one hand (even briefly). Otherwise, you don't have a muff but just the continuation of the original dribble.

depending on the definition of "muff".

4.15.4 D (a) describes A1, while dribbling, batting the ball over the head of an opponent, runs around the opponent, and bats the ball to the floor, and continues to dribble. Ruling: It is a violation to touch the ball twice during a dribble, before it touched the floor.

I would think if she touched it with both hands, before it touched the floor, AND continued a dribble, it would be a violation.

The confusing part (to me, at least), is the rule specifically states simultaneous touching by both hands during the dribble, while the case play does just say "touch the ball twice". But I think the main issue is control - during a dribble the player has control. In your case play, the dribbler controls the ball by batting it over the defender's head and continuing on. However, in the sitch here, it says the player lost control (muffed it; interrupted dribble), so if the player does not have control they cannot violate. For the same reasoning the player cannot be called for a player-control foul as well during the interrupted dribble. The violation occurs when the player dribbles (control), ends the dribble (control), then dribbles again (control).

I don't have my rule book on me right now but I believe Camron and paxsonref are correct. It's not a violation to fumble the ball in an attempt to end a dribble. A player could recover the ball in that situation but couldn't dribble again. In the original situation, I don't think that the fumble would be a voilation but when the player is batting the ball trying to regain control it would be a violation. If the player was batting the ball in the air, I'd have a travel. If they were batting a bouncing ball, double dribble.

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.