2 SLIGHTLY different plays - 2 VERY different calls

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by just another ref
In 4.44.3 Situation A c the ball never leaves A1's hand.

Originally Posted by SmokeEater

What exactly does this case say? I don't have HS case book, so am wondering if its the same ruling as NCAA. I think it is.

A1 jumps to try for goal. B1 also jumps and touches the ball and A1 returns to the floor holding the ball.

[SmokeEater]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Originally Posted by just another ref
In 4.44.3 Situation A c the ball never leaves A1's hand.



A1 jumps to try for goal. B1 also jumps and touches the ball and A1 returns to the floor holding the ball.

This case results in Held ball, go to AP.? Correct?

I am starting to see the confusion in the OP. When the ball leaves the shooters hand then the retrieve it it becomes a travel when they return to the floor.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by SmokeEater

This case results in Held ball, go to AP.? Correct?

I am starting to see the confusion in the OP. When the ball leaves the shooters hand then the retrieve it it becomes a travel when they return to the floor.

In this case the ruling was that the touch did not prevent the release of the ball. (paraphrasing now) The touch merely disoriented A1, after which he returned to the floor, still holding the ball. Traveling

In d of the same situation, A1 drops the ball to the floor and touches it first after it bounces. This is also ruled traveling for starting a dribble with the pivot foot off the floor.

[OHBBREF]

If A1 left the floor to attempt a shot - and it was blocked, there is no travel.
If the shot didn't leave A1's hand it is a held ball go to AP
If the shot left the hand of A1 and was blocked A1 can retrieve tha ball or come down with it rule 4 article 43
section b If the player jumps, neither foot may return to the floof before the ball is released on a pass or try for goal, The ball left A1's hand one inch that makes it a try for goal no travel play on.
I can not see how the Case book would justify trevling here

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by SmokeEater

I am starting to see the confusion in the OP. When the ball leaves the shooters hand then the retrieve it it becomes a travel when they return to the floor.

I don't think so. If the ball leaves the shooter's hand, then player control is lost. The shooter can then retrieve the ball and return to the floor with no penalty. Play on.

It's only a travel if (a) the shooter returns to the floor with continuous control of the ball and (b) the ball was NOT prevented from leaving the shooter's hand by the defender.

[IREFU2]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

I don't think so. If the ball leaves the shooter's hand, then player control is lost. The shooter can then retrieve the ball and return to the floor with no penalty. Play on.

It's only a travel if (a) the shooter returns to the floor with continuous control of the ball and (b) the ball was NOT prevented from leaving the shooter's hand by the defender.

I agree too.

[just another ref]

Casebook 4.44.3 Situation A: d A1 jumps to try for goal. B1 also jumps and touches the ball and A1 drops it to the floor and touches it first after it bounces. Ruling: a violation for starting a dribble with the pivot foot off the floor.


In this case, the book specifies that the ruling did not prevent the release of the ball on a pass or shot. On paper, then, this ruling is undeniable. But in the real world I would think that if B1 touches the ball, more often A1 will be given the benefit of the doubt that B1 knocked the ball loose. Therefore A1 will be allowed to recover the ball in any way without penalty.

[All_Heart]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Casebook 4.44.3 Situation A: d A1 jumps to try for goal. B1 also jumps and touches the ball and A1 drops it to the floor and touches it first after it bounces. Ruling: a violation for starting a dribble with the pivot foot off the floor.


In this case, the book specifies that the ruling did not prevent the release of the ball on a pass or shot. On paper, then, this ruling is undeniable. But in the real world I would think that if B1 touches the ball, more often A1 will be given the benefit of the doubt that B1 knocked the ball loose. Therefore A1 will be allowed to recover the ball in any way without penalty.

I completely disagree. Why penalize the defense?

[rainmaker]

Originally Posted by All_Heart

I completely disagree. Why penalize the defense?

How does what JAR said penalize the defense?