Illegal dribble?

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

The definition of an interrupted dribble mentions it going off the dribbler only or momentarily getting away from the dribbler only.

...

The problem with this play is that it's simply not covered definitively, rules-wise.

Btw, Woddy?

Define momentariliy. The point is that an interruted dribble can occur through just about any action when the dribbler doesn't have control (of the dribble). Off the opponents foot is one such case. Now, when it ceases to be an interrupted dribble may not be clear, but it is, at first, an interrupted dribble. It is most definitely NOT a fumbe, however.

[mick]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Define momentariliy. The point is that an interruted dribble can occur through just about any action when the dribbler doesn't have control (of the dribble). Off the opponents foot is one such case. Now, when it ceases to be an interrupted dribble may not be clear, but it is, at first, an interrupted dribble. It is most definitely NOT a fumbe, however.

Camron,
I don't sight that case.
Can you cite it ?
mick

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Define momentariliy. The point is that an interruted dribble can occur through just about any action when the dribbler doesn't have control (of the dribble). Off the opponents foot is one such case. Now, when it ceases to be an interrupted dribble may not be clear, but it is, at first, an interrupted dribble. It is most definitely NOT a fumbe, however.

Where in the rules may I find something that definitively says that an interrupted dribble may go off another player's foot? I can't find any language like that in the rule books that I own- and I've got the new ones too. The rule books that I've got only mention an interrupted dribble going off the dribbler, or the dribbler momentarily losing it.

Now, you define "momentarily" if you wanna use the interrupted dribble rule. Is it right away, 10 seconds, 34 seconds, etc.? Does "momentarily" cover 9 other players touching the ball and the ball moving 80 feet away from where the dribbler lost it?

Somehow, I really don't think I'm gonna buy that one either, Camron.

If you can't define when it ceases to be an interrupted dribble, then howintheheck can you use the same parameters and rule to back up your interpretation of that rule to say that it's always a violation if the dribbler goes and grabs the loose ball and dribbles again?

If it isn't a fumble and it isn't an interrupted dribble, then what the heck is it? And when you do figure that out, let me know where I can find something in the rule book that definitively covers the situation that we're discussing.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

let me know where I can find something in the rule book that definitively covers the situation that we're discussing.

9-5 is still the cornerstone of the whole thing. Nothing in the book says the dribble has ended, therefore regardless of time consumed and number of people touched, the dribble is still alive.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by just another ref

9-5 is still the cornerstone of the whole thing. Nothing in the book says the dribble has ended, therefore regardless of time consumed and number of people touched, the dribble is still alive.

And there's nothing in the book that says the dribble hasn't ended either. Rule 9-5 can't be the cornerstone if it doesn't cover the situation that we're discussing. It's that simple.

My rulebook doesn't show anything in R9-5 to definitively back up what you're alleging.

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

And there's nothing in the book that says the dribble hasn't ended either. Rule 9-5 can't be the cornerstone if it doesn't cover the situation that we're discussing. It's that simple.

My rulebook doesn't show anything in R9-5 to definitively back up what you're alleging.

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.

[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.