Thu Mar 03, 2005, 02:57pm
|
|
Official Forum Member
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 508
|
|
|
I understand that
Quote:
Originally posted by M&M Guy
Quote:
Originally posted by assignmentmaker
[QUOTE
I don't often disagree with you, but I do on this. I certainly agree with Jurassic that it comes down to judgment. There is now some conventional judgment bruting about. But, in my view, it goes against the spirit and intent to reward a bad, one might even say #$@%%^ play, with an exemption.
Tell me, historically, or rules-committee-wise, why is this exemption there anyway, rewarding bad plays? We don't say that, if you accidentally throw a pass off line and it goes in the backcourt, you have a get-out-of-backcourt-free card.
|
I think you're looking at it from the wrong point of view - it's not a judgement issue regarding rewarding bad plays, but a judgement issue of control. The double-dribble violation occurs when when the player dribbles (control), holds the ball (control), then dribbles again (control). If the player does not have control of the ball, they cannot violate (travel, double-dribble). If a player dribbles, loses control (fumble, flub, screw-up, bad pass, bad hand-eye coordination, whatever you want to call it) and goes and gets it, there is no violation. However, where a violation usually occurs in this case is when the player dribbles, loses it, goes and gets it, picks it up, then starts to dribble again. Losing control and gaining control is not the violation, but dribble, hold, dribble again is.
|
What do you think the mandated (and/or appropriate) call is if a player dribbles, picks up the dribble (gains control), then 'fumbles' or 'mishandles' the ball, drops it, and picks it up?
__________________
Sarchasm: the gulf between the author of sarcastic wit and the recipient.
|
Threaded Mode
