Backcourt violation?

[ChuckElias]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

How do you answer the player that says "Why now? I've been doing it all game". Do you respond "Yes, you were palming the other times but I didn't think that it shoulda been called then".

That's easy. "This time, it got you a clean look at the basket."

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by ChuckElias

That's easy. "This time, it got you a clean look at the basket."

Chuck, if a player ended his dribble by touching the ball with both hands, and then dribbled again, would you also not call that if there was no pressure/backcourt? And if a coach/player asked you about it, would you still say "No call. It didn't get him a clean look at the basket"?

[ChuckElias]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Chuck, if a player ended his dribble by touching the ball with both hands, and then dribbled again, would you also not call that if there was no pressure/backcourt?

Nope. Call it.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by ChuckElias

Nope. Call it.

Aw geeze, now you got me even more confused than usual.

A dribble ends when the ball is palmed/carried by the dribbler or the dribbler touches the ball with both hands. In both cases, if the player dribbles again, it is a violation for an illegal second dribble. But.....under similar circumstances--i.e. in the backcourt with no defensive pressure, you would let the violation go in one case but not the other.

Could you please explain to my uneducated mind just exactly what your rationale is for doing so? They are the exact same violation, by rule, aren't they? What is the difference

[ChuckElias]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Could you please explain to my uneducated mind just exactly what your rationale is for doing so?

I could. But you're not gonna like it. Three words:

"Call the obvious".

I told you that you weren't gonna like it.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by ChuckElias

I could. But you're not gonna like it. Three words:

"Call the obvious".

I told you that you weren't gonna like it.

Whoa.......it's not a matter of liking or not liking something at all. I'm here to learn, and I can't do that until I understand completely where you're coming from.

Are you saying that if you have an obvious palm/carry in the backcourt, with no defensive pressure, you would call the violation?

Could you then please explain exactly what the difference is between what is "obvious" and what is "not obvious" is when it comes to a palm/carry? I just want to know what criteria that one should use to either call the violation or ignore the violation....bearing in mind that both are violations no matter what.

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Are you saying that if you have an obvious palm/carry in the backcourt, with no defensive pressure, you would call the violation?

Could you then please explain exactly what the difference is between what is "obvious" and what is "not obvious" is when it comes to a palm/carry? I just want to know what criteria that one should use to either call the violation or ignore the violation....bearing in mind that both are violations no matter what.

Please, let me...

...a palm in the back court with no defensive pressure is not obvious. The baseball guys have a term for this type of call - it's a F you call.

However, if A1 palms the ball to beat his defender on a drive to the basket...THAT'S an obvious call.

It's very simple, once you own the magic decoder ring.