Illegal dribble?

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by mick

[A player, in control (holding, dribbling), who is trapped by two defenders for 4 seconds, bounces the ball off one of the defenders' foot, or leg, and retrieves the ball may dribble. Yes?]

Is this from the book, mick, or is this your own summary? thanks

[mick]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mick


[A player, in control (holding, dribbling), who is trapped by two defenders for 4 seconds, bounces the ball off one of the defenders' foot, or leg, and retrieves the ball may dribble. Yes?]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Is this from the book, mick, or is this your own summary? thanks

Well, just another ref, now you know that ain't in the 2005-06 Case book.

But 9-5-3 remains quite clear to most readers, and 4-39-1, -2, -3 is in the book, specifically Article 2 :

• "A game regulation, commonly called a rule, sometimes states or implies that the ball is dead or a foul or a violation is involved. If it does not, it is assumed the ball is live and no foul or violation has occurred to affect the situation."

As I implied, if t'ain't no rule agin it, an action is okay.
mick

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by mick

Quote:
........ if t'ain't no rule agin it, an action is okay.
mick

by the letter of the law, there IS a rule agin it. By definition, nothing has happened which ended the dribble. Therefore if the dribbler picks up the ball and starts another, violation. This is a call I remember only once. As I recall, I was uncertain whose foot the ball had hit, the dribbler's or the defender's. Dribbler chased the ball all the way across the court, picked it up and started over. I called the violation. Coach quickly helped me: "No! That hit his (defender's) foot!" I (often mistaken but never in doubt) quickly said, "Doesn't matter, dribble did not end on that." Later we talked about it, I told him I wasn't absolutely sure and would look it up. I did and decided I was right. (what a coincidence) That was probably 5 or 6 years ago and I've never seen this situation before or since, but it seems like something that would happen fairly often.

[mick]

Originally Posted by just another ref

by the letter of the law, there IS a rule agin it. By definition, nothing has happened which ended the dribble. Therefore if the dribbler picks up the ball and starts another, violation. This is a call I remember only once. As I recall, I was uncertain whose foot the ball had hit, the dribbler's or the defender's. Dribbler chased the ball all the way across the court, picked it up and started over. I called the violation. Coach quickly helped me: "No! That hit his (defender's) foot!" I (often mistaken but never in doubt) quickly said, "Doesn't matter, dribble did not end on that." Later we talked about it, I told him I wasn't absolutely sure and would look it up. I did and decided I was right. (what a coincidence) That was probably 5 or 6 years ago and I've never seen this situation before or since, but it seems like something that would happen fairly often.

What if a dribble hit a defender's body part other than the hand or foot?
Would you still call an illegal dribble violation if the dribbler recovered with both hands and started dribbling?

If you call a violation what rule do you use? I just don't see a problem once the opponent has touched the ball.
mick

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by mick

If you call a violation what rule do you use? I just don't see a problem once the opponent has touched the ball.
mick

I probably have nothing if the opponent touched the ball. But I see it differently if the opponent was touched by the ball. If the dribbler loses control because of his own action, whether that involves the ball bouncing off his own foot, a defender's foot, an official's foot, or a dirt clod on the floor, I see nothing to indicate that his dribble has ended, so I would be more inclined to treat this as an interrupted dribble than a fumble or a just cuz.

[mick]

Originally Posted by just another ref

I probably have nothing if the opponent touched the ball. But I see it differently if the opponent was touched by the ball. If the dribbler loses control because of his own action, whether that involves the ball bouncing off his own foot, a defender's foot, an official's foot, or a dirt clod on the floor, I see nothing to indicate that his dribble has ended, so I would be more inclined to treat this as an interrupted dribble than a fumble or a just cuz.

See 4.15.4 Sit.D(c). It clearly states dribble has ended in the case of the dribbler's own foot, but that the ball may be recovered.

No mention of anyone elses foot implies no violation.
mick

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by mick

See 4.15.4 Sit.D(c). It clearly states dribble has ended in the case of the dribbler's own foot, but that the ball may be recovered.

No mention of anyone elses foot implies no violation.
mick

It says the dribble ended when A1 caught the ball, not when it hit his foot. He may recover the ball, yes, but it does not say he can start another dribble. Are you saying that he can in this situation?

[rainmaker]

Originally Posted by just another ref

I probably have nothing if the opponent touched the ball. But I see it differently if the opponent was touched by the ball. If the dribbler loses control because of his own action,

That's your wording, not the rule book's. If it touches anyone else, opponent, ref, teammate, at any body part, player control is lost, the dribble is gone and the former dribbler is entitled to a new dribble.

You may ask why more players don't dribble off opponent's foot as a matter of strategy to gain a new dribble. Well, I think it's more because it's extremely difficult. I can't imagine even the best player pulling it off very often.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by rainmaker

If it touches anyone else, opponent, ref, teammate, at any body part, player control is lost, the dribble is gone and the former dribbler is entitled to a new dribble.

This is what I am asking for. Where is this in the rule book? A dribble does not end just because player control ends. (interrupted dribble) As far as the opponent, 4-15-4 c. states that the dribble ends when An opponent bats (intentionallystrikes the ball with the hand(s)) the ball.
This insinuates to me that the ball touching another part of the body does not end the dribble, with the exception of a kicking violation, which of course causes the ball to become dead.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by rainmaker

That's your wording, not the rule book's. If it touches anyone else, opponent, ref, teammate, at any body part, player control is lost, the dribble is gone and the former dribbler is entitled to a new dribble.

Yup, doing so is interpreted as a fumble under rule 9-5-3. JAR is interpreting 9-5-3 differently than anyone else that I've ever met.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by rainmaker

That's your wording, not the rule book's. If it touches anyone else, opponent, ref, teammate, at any body part, player control is lost, the dribble is gone and the former dribbler is entitled to a new dribble.

The ref is part of the floor and would not be part of the things the ball can touch to enable a second dribble.

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by rainmaker

That's your wording, not the rule book's. If it touches anyone else, opponent, ref, teammate, at any body part, player control is lost, the dribble is gone and the former dribbler is entitled to a new dribble.

Camron made a great catch on this. As worded here this is a common basketball myth, I'm amazed when above kiddy ball a player will look at me in disbelief and shock when he restarts his dribble after an opponent merely touches the ball and I blow the whistle. But it happens, and my response is always to smile and say "You are kidding me, right?"

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by just another ref

That was probably 5 or 6 years ago and I've never seen this situation before or since, but it seems like something that would happen fairly often.

Maybe it's in the 2000-01 case book right next to the rule about a disqualified player shooting a free throw.

[mick]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Maybe it's in the 2000-01 case book right next to the rule about a disqualified player shooting a free throw.

BadNewsRef
It's not.
Just checked.