Women's Championship Game

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by jkjenning

The rules, taken with the case plays, do leave room for debate on this. The judgment of an official (not one's ability to "read minds") is a common part of interpreting how the rules are to be applied (was it a shot attempt or a pass? was the contact intentional or incidental? etc.), and the key to defining the point at which a double dribble occurs seems to be whether the official determines that a pass was attempted or a dribble was to be continued. If a pass was attempted, then the dribbler must touch the ball again before the pass can be ruled a dribble; if, in the judgment of the official, a second dribble was begun, then the violation is immediate.

That's exactly why the vast majority of officials imo will always judge an airball to be a try. They would have to be a mind reader to know that the player intended to pass the ball instead of shoot.

The other option after ending the dribble would be a fumble, which is also legal to go and get. Whether it was a fumble vs. a pass vs. a dribble is always a judgment call too.

One of the oldest adages in officiating is "If you aren't sure, don't call it". Speaking my own behalf, I can't be sure that a player meant to dribble until he actually does dribble. Sorry, but I'm not going to call any violation until I'm sure that one has actually been committed. If you blow your whistle, and the dribbler then turns away from the ball before touching it again, you have some mighty tall 'splaining to do if asked. And I don't have a clue personally how you could explain it.

[jkjenning]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

That's exactly why the vast majority of officials imo will always judge an airball to be a try. They would have to be a mind reader to know that the player intended to pass the ball instead of shoot.

The other option after ending the dribble would be a fumble, which is also legal to go and get. Whether it was a fumble vs. a pass vs. a dribble is always a judgment call too.

One of the oldest adages in officiating is "If you aren't sure, don't call it".

I certainly have no disagreement on how to determine, in practice, that a violation has taken place; there is room for discussion on how the rules define the exact occurence of a double dribble. The time between a double dribble starting, by rule definition, and actual contact with the dribbler is so short that I am quite certain I will not be rushing to the court to proudly show off "improved reaction time" to double dribbles!

[Adam]

Here's the question.
A1, who has ended his dribble, pushes the ball down for what looks like another dribble. Before A1 touches the ball following the bounce, the official whistles a double dribble violation just before a) A2 swoops in and grabs the ball or b) just before B1 kicks it.
Is the official correct? I think not.

[jkjenning]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Here's the question.
A1, who has ended his dribble, pushes the ball down for what looks like another dribble. Before A1 touches the ball following the bounce, the official whistles a double dribble violation just before a) A2 swoops in and grabs the ball or b) just before B1 kicks it.
Is the official correct? I think not.

Nor do I, but the official could be thinking quite narrowly about the rules and, technically, the rules would back him/her up since their judgment that another dribble had begun agrees with the definition of the start of a dribble.

[BillyMac]

In my opinion, "Palming" could be considered a form of traveling, or an illegal (double) dribble, depending on how you view the violation.

[Adam]

Until a few years ago, it was technically either a double dribble or a travel, depending on which happened first. They added the palming designation recently.

[OHBBREF]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Until a few years ago, it was technically either a double dribble or a travel, depending on which happened first. They added the palming designation recently.

the Palming designation has existed for years a number of years ago the signal was dropped from useage and the illegal dribble signal was used, just about two years ago it was brought back because it specifically addressed the violation that was again brought to the points of emphasis.