I think he's ending the dribble (in the OP) because he brings the ball to rest in his hands (4-15-4 a.) and possibly touches the ball with both hands (4-15-4 c.)

And fanboys get upset with my (correct) interpretation of the "jump stop" rule.

So do you call a travel every time a player's non-pivot foot moves without dribbling? :rolleyes:

You left out the most important part - during a dribble. The dribble ends when he picks up the ball to shoot it. IMO, we're doing the same thing here (on a double touch) as when a player clearly picks up the ball, then bounce passes it to a teammate. We wait to see if it's a pass or the start of another dribble.

Wayne, welcome, but I'm going to have to disagree with your central tenet.

There are plenty of things that can happen in a basketball game that are perfectly within the rules, but give an advantage to one team or the other. A well-placed screen, set within the limits of the appropriate rules, gives a huge advantage to an offensive team. Having the lower block on a FT gives a large advantage in rebounding. Both of these are tipping the balance one way or the other - what the referees are there to prevent is an advantage not allowed or intended by a rule.

4-15-4: The dribble may be started by pushing, throwing, or batting the ball to the floor.......

Throwing and batting are interchangeable when it comes to a dribble.

4.15.4 SIT E b:since the ball did not touch the floor, the tossing and subsequent catch is an illegal dribble.

The argument that the OP is not a violation seems to be based on the idea that the catch ends the dribble. True enough: 4.15.4.a The dribble ends when the dribbler......catches the ball.

SO, why in the above situation did the catch, which ends the dribble,
prevent a violation?

I hereby join the camp which says that the OP is indeed a violation.

I believe even more firmly, however, that this is one of those that is in a somewhat gray area which slips through the cracks of the rules and is not definitively covered. I also am reasonably sure that this is a play that I have never witnessed in 20+ years as an official and more years than that as a spectator.

Bottom line, if we have a play in this category, be quick and emphatic with the call, and try to avoid pausing and scratching your head between the whistle and the signal. And really hope that it doesn't happen twice and you and your partner make opposite calls.

That is not the issue here. If a player has ended his dribble, then throws the ball toward a teammate, then for whatever reason, goes and catches it himself, it is an illegal dribble whether it hits the floor first or not.

I think that catching the ball does prevent a violation. I (at least) believe that if the player threw the ball into the air, then touched it at all and let it bounce, we'd have a violation.


I can certainly see where the disagreement comes from. I think that if NFHS wants a violation called, 4-15-2 should state that a violation should be called, and the situation should be added to rule 9.

Agreed, but the point is the same - sometimes we need to wait to see what the outcome of the entire play is before we can call a violation.

True. I think what's hanging people up is the separation of the determination from the time of occurrence.

Once the ball is batted upward, it cannot be determined that the dribble ends until the ball is caught, because opportunity has to be granted for it to hit the floor. However, once that determination is made, the ball not having hit the floor before being caught, the dribble is known retroactively to have ended when the ball was so batted. Therefore the batting of the ball to himself did not occur during an interval when the player was dribbling, and it's a violation whose name is apparently undetermined.

This is not the only example in basketball of "suspense" in a determination. AFAIK in USA-Canada rules (NCAA-AAU) 3 seconds in the lane may similarly be determined retroactively when a player with the ball in the attacking lane stops penetrating toward his goal.

Robert

You sure about that? I didn't see it listed as one of the specifically illegal dribbles. Does the definition of "dribble" encompass it? JimGolf wrote:

That would be true only if it's a dribble.

Robert

The "during" is only refering to the time of the bat, nothing else. The though has no such restriction...it's simply a touch....either during the dribble or ending it.

Where may I find a rule in any ruleset that states that batting the ball ends a dribble?

Nobody said that batting the ball per se ends a dribble. After all, dribbling is continued by batting the ball against the floor. But this particular batting of the ball ended that dribble, because it did not continue the dribble.

Robert

"Not continuing [a] dribble" does not end a dribble. The only things that can actually end a dribble are listed in 4-15-4.

What he said......

Batting the ball is not listed as one of the things that will <b>end</b> a dribble.