Illegal dribble?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

Woody, Woody, Woody....c'mon buddy, you know better than that.

4-15-4 tells us that a dribble ends when:
The dribbler catches or causes the ball to come to rest in one or both hands.
The dribbler palms/carries the ball by allowing it to come to rest in one or both hands.
The dribbler simultaneously touches the ball with both hands.
An opponent bats (intentionally strikes the ball with the hand(s)) the ball.
The ball becomes dead.

None of those things happened in this play. We don't need a rule that tells us when it DOESN'T end. You know that.

Sooooooo.......you really believe that it's still a dribble if the ball hits someone's foot, then hits 8 other different players on the floor- some of 'em 2 or 3 times- and ends up 80 feet away from where the dribbler last touched it?

That dribble never ended?

Tony, Tony, Tony......you know that I ain't gonna buy that crock of poo-poo.

Btw, what happened to Woddy?

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Sooooooo.......you really believe that it's still a dribble if the ball hits someone's foot, then hits 8 other different players on the floor- some of 'em 2 or 3 times- and ends up 80 feet away from where the dribbler last touched it?

That dribble never ended?

Woody knows the above question is a crock of poo poo. Woody knows the rule and doesn't make Rutlike arguments. Woddy evidently doesn't comprehend the rule. I thought I was addressing Woody but I guess I'll address Woddy again.



Hey Woddy, whether you like it or not, in you far out, theoretical scenario, the dribble does not end. The rule is what it is. You can make up scenarios and say "because the ball touched X number of players, it's no longer a dribble," but it's not true. If someone made such an argument to you, you'd tell them "That's bull$h!t."

Now, rather than trying to confuse the issue with some stupid, far out scenario, let's stick to the original one. The dribble goes off one defender's foot. The rule tells us that this is NOT one of the ways that a dribble ends. You know it, I know it, and Woody knows it.

So continue to argue this if you like. But you know you're wrong about the play and the rule, and you just won't admit it. Hell, if I had been so adamant and so wrong for 6 pages, I wouldn't change horses now either.

Now, I'm done. I have to go make fun of Woddy with JAR via PM.

[Jurassic Referee]

Well, if either you or JAR can ever come up with a rule that's actually relevant to the original situation, be sure and let us know. You haven't come up with a definitive one yet.

Good luck with that......

[mick]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Well, if either you or JAR can ever come up with a rule that's actually relevant to the original situation, be sure and let us know. You haven't come up with a definitive one yet.

Good luck with that......

4-15-4 tells us that a dribble ends when:
The dribbler catches or causes the ball to come to rest in one or both hands.
The dribbler palms/carries the ball by allowing it to come to rest in one or both hands.
The dribbler simultaneously touches the ball with both hands.
An opponent bats (intentionally strikes the ball with the hand(s)) the ball.
The ball becomes dead.

JR,
Are you having trouble reading?

Can't you see what they are saying? If the dribbler bounces the ball to defender and the defender passes the ball to a teammate, but the dribbler steals it back, the dribbler cannot dribble because the dribble never ended :

1. because the dribbler did not catch or cause the ball to come to rest;
2. because the dribbler did not palm or carry;
3. because the defender did not bat the ball.

Does that make it more clear? Yikes !!!
mick

[just another ref]

Player A1 fouls out, goes to the bench, and removes his jersey. He is promptly given a technical foul. He is upset and leaves the gym, but before doing so climbs on a chair and ties his jersey securely across his opponents' basket. Ruling: Removal of the jersey was illegal and properly penalized, but opponents shots are now allowed to bounce off because tying the jersey on the rim is not definitively prohibited by rule.

[Nevadaref]

I'm betting that there will be a new case play or interp from the NFHS regarding this. Any takers?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

I'm betting that there will be a new case play or interp from the NFHS regarding this. Any takers?

Well, over the last few years I have noticed that case plays have shown up several times after we have had lengthy rules discussions here about something that is not definitively covered. Coincidence? I think not. Somehow, I think that our discussions are getting back to someone close to the FED rule committee.

Until then though, with regards to this particular play, I think that truly wise officials will follow the tried-and-true maxim that has guided countless officials over the years in their pursuit of greatness-- "What would Woddy do?"