Is This an Attempt?

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by cshs81

I can see how your example is a violation. However, there is one difference in the play I described: the defender never made contact with the ball. Does that change anything in your mind?

If he didn't release the ball on a try for goal, but instead the ball slipped out of his hands and went backwards, then it wasn't a try--it was a fumble--and thus should be called a violation.

[cshs81]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

If he didn't release the ball on a try for goal, but instead the ball slipped out of his hands and went backwards, then it wasn't a try--it was a fumble--and thus should be called a violation.

So a ball that obviously slips from the shooters hands is never a try, correct?

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by cshs81

So a ball that obviously slips from the shooters hands is never a try, correct?

That would be correct. You will have to make a judgment on whether he shot it or it slipped from his hands, but the definition of a fumble is quite clear.

4-21 "A fumble is the accidental loss of player control when the ball unintentionally drops or slips from a player's grasp."

[sseltser]

Couldn't that also be a travel that occurs at the same time (assuming it was a jump shot)?

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by sseltser

Couldn't that also be a travel that occurs at the same time (assuming it was a jump shot)?

NO! Traveling occurs while a player is holding the ball. A player may always recover a fumble without violating.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Originally posted by cshs81- So is a ball that obviously slips from a shooter's hand is never a try, correct?"

That would be correct. You will have to make a judgment on whether he shot it or it slipped from his hands, but the definition of a fumble is quite clear.

4-21 "A fumble is the accidental loss of player control when the ball unintentionally drops or slips from a player's grasp."

Again, I disagree. That wouldn't be correct. The definition of a fumble is clear, but whether a fumble actually occurred on this play isn't clear. If an official judged that the player shot it(as you said yourself above), then it is a try and you can't have a backcourt violation.

Iow, a ball that obviously slips from a shooter's hand can be ruled a try if the official judged it as a being a try.

Gee, I hate to be all cranky and nit-picky, but methinks you're contradicting yourself now, Nevada.

Btw, your being a typical fanboy when it comes to your favorite team--dear ol' Nevada U.- has got nuthin' to do with nuthin'. I know what you fanboys are like. It's always the officials' fault.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Again, I disagree. That wouldn't be correct. The definition of a fumble is clear, but whether a fumble actually occurred on this play isn't clear. If an official judged that the player shot it(as you said yourself above), then it is a try and you can't have a backcourt violation.

Iow, a ball that obviously slips from a shooter's hand can be ruled a try if the official judged it as a being a try.

Gee, I hate to be all cranky and nit-picky, but methinks you're contradicting yourself now, Nevada.

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Btw, your being a typical fanboy when it comes to your favorite team--dear ol' Nevada U.- has got nuthin' to do with nuthin'. I know what you fanboys are like. It's always the officials' fault.

Actually, I have been asked numerous times about the ending because Coach Fox was quite upset about the play and firmly believed that Spicer from Utah State traveled. I have stated every time that the officials got it right as there was a clear bump which caused the travel. Utah State won that one fair and square.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

My work here is done.