The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Sun Mar 05, 2006, 09:37am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 168
Send a message via AIM to tjchamp
A1, a little too far under the basket, goes up for the shot but the ball hits the bottom of the backboard on his way up. He never really loses control of the ball (it never left his hands), and comes down to the floor. Would this count as a shot attempt, or would it be travelling?
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Sun Mar 05, 2006, 09:50am
In Memoriam
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Houghton, U.P., Michigan
Posts: 9,953
Lightbulb

Quote:
Originally posted by tjchamp
A1, a little too far under the basket, goes up for the shot but the ball hits the bottom of the backboard on his way up. He never really loses control of the ball (it never left his hands), and comes down to the floor. Would this count as a shot attempt, or would it be travelling?

Jumped with control. Landed with continuous control.
Opponent did not prevent release.
I have a travel.
mick
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Sun Mar 05, 2006, 09:51am
Fav theme: Roundball Rock
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Near Dog River (sorta)
Posts: 8,558
This is a travel.

By your description, the player never lost control of the ball. He left the floor, then returned to the floor. Travel.
__________________
Pope Francis
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Sun Mar 05, 2006, 11:45am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 168
Send a message via AIM to tjchamp
What would be your response if, after the ball hits the bottom of the backboard, A1 momentarily loses control of the ball, but still comes down with it?
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Sun Mar 05, 2006, 12:52pm
In Memoriam
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Houghton, U.P., Michigan
Posts: 9,953
Lightbulb

Quote:
Originally posted by tjchamp
What would be your response if, after the ball hits the bottom of the backboard, A1 momentarily loses control of the ball, but still comes down with it?
My response would be to continue watching the action.
Nothing there.
mick
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Sun Mar 05, 2006, 01:11pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 508
Quote:
Originally posted by tjchamp
What would be your response if, after the ball hits the bottom of the backboard, A1 momentarily loses control of the ball, but still comes down with it?
Control would seem to be the gating item.

Consider what you would call if the player hit not the bottom of the backboard but the rim - its bottom, side, or top for that matter. If it walks like a dunk and talks like a dunk, is it a dunk? I'd say no, not if the the player doesn't relinquish player control of the ball. Travel.
__________________
Sarchasm: the gulf between the author of sarcastic wit and the recipient.
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Mon Mar 06, 2006, 05:01pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 98
either you had a walk or a jump stop because of control of the ball, Walk!


I take that back they are both travels -
if the ball hit the back board in the players hands and then he lost control of it - then landed there was no shot attempt I think that (S)He walked

[Edited by Rick82358 on Mar 6th, 2006 at 05:04 PM]
__________________
The trouble with officials is they just don't care who wins.

Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Mon Mar 06, 2006, 06:14pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 508
Quote:
Originally posted by Rick82358



I take that back they are both travels -
if the ball hit the back board in the players hands and then he lost control of it - then landed there was no shot attempt I think that (S)He walked

[Edited by Rick82358 on Mar 6th, 2006 at 05:04 PM]
Well, let's put it this way: it's not going to be a held ball between the backboard and the player . . .

The loss of control you describe could be seen as a fumble; if so, the player would have the right to come down with the ball, I believe.
__________________
Sarchasm: the gulf between the author of sarcastic wit and the recipient.
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Mon Mar 06, 2006, 07:40pm
In Memoriam
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Hell
Posts: 20,211
Quote:
Originally posted by assignmentmaker
Quote:
Originally posted by Rick82358



I take that back they are both travels -
if the ball hit the back board in the players hands and then he lost control of it - then landed there was no shot attempt I think that (S)He walked

Well, let's put it this way: it's not going to be a held ball between the backboard and the player . . .

The loss of control you describe could be seen as a fumble; if so, the player would have the right to come down with the ball, I believe.
Yup, he does have the right to come down with the ball. Of course, he should be called for traveling as soon as he finishes exercising that right.

If they go up with player control....and come down with player control....and the ball was never touched by another player when it was loose on a fumble.... or a "try" was never released....or a defender didn't stop a "try" from being released.......then it's a travel because of a pivot-foot violation.

[Edited by Jurassic Referee on Mar 7th, 2006 at 07:56 AM]
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Tue Mar 07, 2006, 11:07am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 518
Quote:
Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

Quote:
Well, let's put it this way: it's not going to be a held ball between the backboard and the player . . .

The loss of control you describe could be seen as a fumble; if so, the player would have the right to come down with the ball, I believe.
Yup, he does have the right to come down with the ball. Of course, he should be called for traveling as soon as he finishes exercising that right.

If they go up with player control....and come down with player control....and the ball was never touched by another player when it was loose on a fumble.... or a "try" was never released....or a defender didn't stop a "try" from being released.......then it's a travel because of a pivot-foot violation.

[Edited by Jurassic Referee on Mar 7th, 2006 at 07:56 AM]
My interpretation was that you may always recover a fumble. A fumble is a loss of player control so I thought the player may recover the ball while in the air and come back down with it. Is there a case play covering this?
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Tue Mar 07, 2006, 11:42am
In Memoriam
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Hell
Posts: 20,211
Quote:
Originally posted by All_Heart
Quote:
Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

Quote:
Well, let's put it this way: it's not going to be a held ball between the backboard and the player . . .

The loss of control you describe could be seen as a fumble; if so, the player would have the right to come down with the ball, I believe.
Yup, he does have the right to come down with the ball. Of course, he should be called for traveling as soon as he finishes exercising that right.

If they go up with player control....and come down with player control....and the ball was never touched by another player when it was loose on a fumble.... or a "try" was never released....or a defender didn't stop a "try" from eing released.......then it's a travel because of a pivot-foot violation.

My interpretation was that you may always recover a fumble. A fumble is a loss of player control so I thought the player may recover the ball while in the air and come back down with it. Is there a case play covering this?
Rule 4-44-3a&b covers the play. Also see case book play 4.43.3SitB. The key to the call is not whether the shooter lost player control in the air; it's whether he lost team control in the air. To avoid a travel, team control must be lost by the player in the air.
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old Tue Mar 07, 2006, 11:54am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 508
Quote:
Originally posted by Jurassic Referee
Quote:
Originally posted by assignmentmaker
Quote:
Originally posted by Rick82358



I take that back they are both travels -
if the ball hit the back board in the players hands and then he lost control of it - then landed there was no shot attempt I think that (S)He walked

Well, let's put it this way: it's not going to be a held ball between the backboard and the player . . .

The loss of control you describe could be seen as a fumble; if so, the player would have the right to come down with the ball, I believe.
Yup, he does have the right to come down with the ball. Of course, he should be called for traveling as soon as he finishes exercising that right.

If they go up with player control....and come down with player control....and the ball was never touched by another player when it was loose on a fumble.... or a "try" was never released....or a defender didn't stop a "try" from being released.......then it's a travel because of a pivot-foot violation.

[Edited by Jurassic Referee on Mar 7th, 2006 at 07:56 AM]
"then it's a travel because of a pivot-foot violation."

I am not a fan of the fumble rule. It may be a structural necessity, but it also rewards mistakes.

That being said, it's generally (but perhaps not perfectly) true that a player who lifts their pivot foot must pass or shoot (or stand on one leg . . . ).

Consider 9.5.1 SITUATION: A1 ends a dribble and then jumps and releases the ball on a try for goal. B1 partially blocks the shot, but A1 secures control again while still in the air. A1 returns to the floor and dribbles to the basket and scores. RULING: Legal maneuver. Both player control and team control ended when A1 released the ball. When A1 recovered he/she could dribble again similar to dribbling after catching a pass or rebound.

Noting that a FUMBLE is (4-21) "accidental loss of player control when the ball unintentionally drops or slips from a player's grasp", if a player standing on both feet and in control establishes a pivot foot (lifts one foot), then fumbles the ball, may s/he not retrieve the ball, no matter that the pivot foot comes down, no matter how many steps it takes?




__________________
Sarchasm: the gulf between the author of sarcastic wit and the recipient.
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old Tue Mar 07, 2006, 12:45pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 98
Thumbs up

Consider 9.5.1 SITUATION: A1 ends a dribble and then jumps and releases the ball on a try for goal. B1 partially blocks the shot, but A1 secures control again while still in the air. A1 returns to the floor and dribbles to the basket and scores.
RULING: Legal maneuver. Both player control and team control ended when A1 released the ball. When A1 recovered he/she could dribble again similar to dribbling after catching a pass or rebound.




The difference here is that the ball originally left the players hand on a try for goal, Loss of player and team control - Therefore there was no piviot foot established because the ball was recovered and fumbled and rerecovered in the air - when the player returned to the floor the first foot to hit was the pivot foot. As long as that dribble started before the player lifted that pivot foot, it is a legal play.
__________________
The trouble with officials is they just don't care who wins.

Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old Tue Mar 07, 2006, 01:24pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 508
Quote:
Originally posted by Rick82358
Consider 9.5.1 SITUATION: A1 ends a dribble and then jumps and releases the ball on a try for goal. B1 partially blocks the shot, but A1 secures control again while still in the air. A1 returns to the floor and dribbles to the basket and scores.
RULING: Legal maneuver. Both player control and team control ended when A1 released the ball. When A1 recovered he/she could dribble again similar to dribbling after catching a pass or rebound.




The difference here is that the ball originally left the players hand on a try for goal, Loss of player and team control - Therefore there was no piviot foot established because the ball was recovered and fumbled and rerecovered in the air - when the player returned to the floor the first foot to hit was the pivot foot. As long as that dribble started before the player lifted that pivot foot, it is a legal play.
I understand that 9.5.1 is not exactly the play under consideration. But it establishes, does it not, that a player may leave the floor with control, have control terminate then be reestablished, then legally return to the floor?
__________________
Sarchasm: the gulf between the author of sarcastic wit and the recipient.
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old Tue Mar 07, 2006, 03:40pm
In Memoriam
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Hell
Posts: 20,211
Quote:
Originally posted by assignmentmaker
[/B]
I understand that 9.5.1 is not exactly the play under consideration. But it establishes, does it not, that a player may leave the floor with control, have control terminate then be reestablished, then legally return to the floor? [/B][/QUOTE]No, it sureasheck doesn't. The legality of the play depends on the type of control that is terminated in the air. 9.5.1 says that if team control ends, it's legal to return to the floor. If team control doesn't end, it's a travel- or a held ball if a defender stopped the player from releasing the ball.

Simple as that.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:14pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1