She "kicked" it, and then I kicked it
 

The ball is loose on a rebound, and is bouncing low towards A1. Instinctively, she narrows her knees to stop it, trapping it between her shins. The lead sees it clearly, does nothing, and play goes on. I guess it was something he hadn’t seen and it caught him off guard. I was lead. ;)

Violation on A. Ball to be nearest to where the violation occurs.

and don't kick it anymore! ::snicker::

I don't see an intentional kick here.
Also, sounds a lot like a jr.high game, yes? :)

She intentionally squeezed her shins together to catch the ball.
Freshman girls. Close enough. :D

If a player intentionally strikes the ball with ANY part of the leg or foot it is a violation. Seems to me that the girl intentionally moved her legs to stop the ball, hence the violation.

A violation occurs anytime a player, with their legs, places a "vice-like grip" on the ball.

Catching the ball and intentionally striking the ball are the same?
I remain unsure.
Cases show intentionally deflecting and kicking with foot, but not catching.
Sell me.

Rule source?

There's a specific NCAA AR that applies. Most (?) have the interp apply to FED as well, although I don't recall any specific play.

Bob,
Is that the one about trapping the ball on the floor?

I believe the AR has to do with a player trapping the ball between their legs, and the opponent grabbing the ball as well. This is not a held ball situation, but a violation on the player holding it with their legs.

The rule says "intentionally strike the ball." Most interpret "strike" to include any movement of the leg with the intent of touching the ball. Now, in my situation, before the ball was trapped, it actually bounced of one leg.

Snaqwells,
Do you remember what her hands were doing at the time of the trap?
Was she clumsy? Was she redirecting the ball? Did she merely mis-field the grounder?

I do. I had a great view. She was in the process of reach down to grab it when her knees moved together. It wasn't an awkward movement; more like a hockey goalie pinching his legs together to prevent the puck from going through. She looked down, squeezed her knees to trap it, reached to grab the ball, and passed it.

Thanks, Snaq.
Even more clearly now, I do not think think she intentionally kicked the ball.

I know it's the wrong forum, but to steal from the football forum, "touching" precedes "catching," which also makes tremendous sense, and this logic could theoretically be applied here. And I've also had the NCAA situation read to me that was cited above, and think it makes pretty good sense and is clearly applicable in the OP situation.

Using your leg(s) to gain an advantage is a kick...it doesn't have to be a violent striking to be a kick.

Let's say the ball is loose on the floor with 3 players still on their feet trying to grab it, when one player uses their foot to move the ball closer to them to grab...gonna call that a kick?

I see no difference between a subtle little "kick" like that and pulling the ball in or trapping it with your legs, so you can grab it.;)

Apparently, my whistle agreed with you. :)

Surely, I have a kick on that.
Yet incidentally trapping the ball with her legs, when her hands failed her, still doesn't feel like an intentional kick.
But it may be.

Her hands didn't fail. They couldn't get to the floor quickly enough, so she purposefully used her legs to trap the ball and buy herself some time.

So, she intentionally contacted the ball with her legs, AND gained an advantage by doing so. You wouldn't consider that a violation?

NFHS Rule 4-29 [Kicking the ball is intentionally striking with any part of the leg or foot.], and Rule 9-4 [A player shall not travel with the ball, as in 4-44, intentionally kick it, as in 4-29, strike it with the fist or cause it to enter and pass through the basket from below.].

The player consciously and intentionally moved her legs to stop or catch the ball. TWEET! Violation. Coach may not like it, but it would seem to be the right call.

I dunno! I dunno! I dunno! :)

It's one of those location plays. You had to be there. :)

If only the rule makers would use the correct words when they write the rules.

Kicking is intentionally contacting the ball with any part of your leg.

Remove the violent term of striking and the intent of the rule becomes clear.;)

Seconded..............

Forgive me - I don't have my books with me. Does the rulebook ever actually say "contacting" or does it only say "striking"? There's a big difference in my eyes between those two words, so I'm still as confused as Mick about trapping the ball between the legs and how that relates to the intent of the rule.

Smitty,
The rule book says "striking." However, the NCAA Ruling on this says pretty clearly that trapping the ball with the legs fits the definition. HS refs generally defer to this interpretation due to the lack of an official interpretation from the Fed.

In my scenario, picture a hockey goalie squeezing his shins together to prevent the puck from going between his legs. That's what the player did in my game. The ball actually bounced off of one leg (while she was moving them together to redirect the ball) before she got it trapped, while she was moving her hands down to grab it.

I totally understand the scenario and I know that probably most people would call this a kick - I just don't see it clearly being so based on the wording of the NFHS rule. I didn't realize that the NCAA ruling actually referenced this exact scenario, so that would definitely make me lean more toward that way of thinking. It's difficult to back it up with an explanation based on that darn "striking" word, though, in a purely NFHS scenario. I would be much happier if they changed "striking" to "contacting". Thanks for the NCAA interpretation.

If Washington had drowned crossing the Potomac, we may all be speaking English.

9-4 "strike it with fist" is a violation. Is contact with fist a violation?

I can't think of a situation where it shouldn't be.

A pass hits a running player on the back of a closed hand....

I should clarify, the NCAA interp addresses a loose ball situation. A1 squeezes the ball between his legs while B1 grabs it with his hands. This is, according to the ruling, a kicking violation on A1. In light of this and in the absence of an alternate ruling from the Fed, I have to interpret "striking" as "moving to contact."

Two entirely different issues.

Kicking the ball is gaining an advantage by extending your reach, making it easier to defend a pass, or in this case moving and/or stopping the ball so you can grab it.

Striking with the fist is all about the safety issue of fists flying on the court.

Generally ?
C'mon, Snaq !
I can think of at least one or two guys that have never seen, or heard, that interpretation.

Interesting connection, Mick. The rule says nothing about intent with the fist; so by rule, any contact with the fist should be a violation. going to depend on the play, though. :)

Yeah, fair enough. :)

'Zactly !
One is hittin' and the other is gittin'.

What would be the argument against changing the wording in both to "intentionally contacting the ball with (fist, any part of the leg)"? -As this is what the intent of the rule seems to be. I think I'm going to write my Congressman right now.

Aha, Hawkeye ! Good idea.
But don't ask the lame duck ask the real one. :)

So, yeah, if they wrote that even I could understand.

You ump baseball, don't you, Mick?

Interesting point on the distinction between strike and contact, btw. Can't say I have any clue how I'd call it.

YU.P., Mark. I do. :)

Since we're discussing the fine points between "strike" and "contact", I should point out that it was the Delaware in which Washington didn't drown.

BTW if contacting the leg is a violation, what if I stand with the ball on my hip.

Is your hip part of your leg?:confused:

Hmmm...seems we needed a Mr Annoying History Guy and were too dumb to know it. Welcome aboard, Rainmaker will show you how the coffee machine works.

Good call, tonyp. The Potomac was the "silver dollar" story, eh? :)

The hip thing made me think of this scenario.
Let's say the ball was held with one hand on the ball against the hip.
The ball slips and the player grabs the ball with his knees.
I don't have a kick there either. ;)

Technically the hip would be inside of your leg. See my previous post about calling flagrant fouls for arms in opponents.

Well, what I'll show him is how to make sure that he makes the coffee badly enough that no one evers asks him again!

Basketball is played with the hands not the feet, other wise we would be playing the other football

Violation

I do, after I put my whistle back in my mouth. You see, I just dropped it watching the highly athletic move of a player moving their body in such a way required to catch a ball with their knees after dropping it from outside their hip. In the time it takes a ball to drop 12 inches, they've moved at least one leg around the ball.

Actually, in the natural order of things, it's the woman's job to fetch the coffee.

I think that's somewhere in the Bible or somethin' iirc.

bttttttttttttt