Self pass or not?

[utrook31]

Please help with the ruling on this questionable play. Player A1 is being defended by B1 and A2 is setting up a screen. A1 ends his dribble and tosses the ball off the back of A2 and thusly continues to dribble. Legal or not? Thanks.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by utrook31

Player A1 is being defended by B1 and A2 is setting up a screen. A1 ends his dribble and tosses the ball off the back of A2 and thusly continues to dribble.

Legal last year under NFHS rules as per rule 9-5-3 and case book play 9.5.3.

May not be legal this year. It's an announced NFHS rule change. They're changing the language from player(who is anyone on the court) to opponent. We'll have to wait and see the change in case book 9.5.3 to make completely sure whether it's become illegal or not. I suspect that it has.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Legal last year under NFHS rules as per rule 9-5-3 and case book play 9.5.3.

May not be legal this year. It's an announced NFHS rule change. They're changing the language from player(who is anyone on the court) to opponent. We'll have to wait and see the change in case book 9.5.3 to make completely sure whether it's become illegal or not. I suspect that it has.

Of all people, I thought that you would be able to identify a play in which a dribble has already ended!

Seriously, the change for this coming season only has to do with how a dribble ends; it has nothing to do with throwing a pass thereafter. All that the NFHS is saying is that a player may now dribble again, if he lost control of his dribble due to the ball touching/deflecting off of an opponent, the opponent doesn't have to intentionally bat it. Hence 9-5-2, not 9-5-3, was cited by the NFHS as the rule to be changed.

This change has nothing at all to do with the play posed by the OP, in which the player has already ended his dribble and is passing the ball. It is merely intended to cover a play in which the dribbler accidently bounces the ball off an opponents foot and it rolls away. It makes it clear that he can go pick up the ball and then dribble again without violating.

Despite not grasping the purpose of the coming NFHS change, you did point out the applicable rule for the OP's play.

9-5-3
A player shall not dribble a second time after his/her first dribble has ended, unless it is after he/she has lost control because of:

. . . A pass or fumble which has then touched, or been touched by, another player.

So the facts of the OP's play are: A1 has ended his dribble, A1 threw a pass which touched A2, A1 got the ball back and dribbled again. Ruling: Perfectly legal according to 9-5-3.

[JRutledge]

This is very legal and do not see how it would not continue to be legal. This is basically an unsuccessful pass where another player touches it and of course the "passer" can go back and pick up the ball.

For the record a "self-pass" is not itself illegal. At the very least it might be the start of a dribble under the rules.

Peace

[SmokeEater]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

For the record a "self-pass" is not itself illegal. At the very least it might be the start of a dribble under the rules.

Let's NOT start this again..... LOL

reference: self bat thread

[BktBallRef]

There's no such thing as a self pass.

The play is completely legal.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

There's no such thing as a self pass.

The play is completely legal.

That's true. Passes are to TEAMMATES. When a player throws the ball and retrieves it himself, it is either a legal or an illegal dribble unless it was a try for goal.

[utrook31]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

That's true. Passes are to TEAMMATES. When a player throws the ball and retrieves it himself, it is either a legal or an illegal dribble unless it was a try for goal.

That's the point I'm arguing. If it is clear that his intent was only to continue his dribble and the teammate has no possible way of receiving the pass (as it was thrown off his back from 3" away), would there still be no call on the play?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by utrook31

That's the point I'm arguing. If it is clear that his intent was only to continue his dribble and the teammate has no possible way of receiving the pass (as it was thrown off his back from 3" away), would there still be no call on the play?

Intent has nothing to do with this situation. If the ball touches another player it cannot be an illegal dribble or act. You are over thinking this waaaayyyyy toooooo much.

Peace

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by utrook31

That's the point I'm arguing. If it is clear that his intent was only to continue his dribble and the teammate has no possible way of receiving the pass (as it was thrown off his back from 3" away), would there still be no call on the play?

As soon as the thrown ball touches the other player the action meets the definition of a pass. What the thrower actually wanted to do has nothing to do with it. When officiating plays, you have to go by the definitions.

4-31 A pass is movement of the ball caused by a player who throws, bats or rolls the ball to another player.

[BktBallRef]

Try this, utrook31.

Thrower A1 is standing OOB with the ball on his own endline. B1 has his back to A1. A1 throws the ball off B1's back, steps inbounds, recovers the ball, shoots and scores. legal Play? Of course it is. It makes no difference that he did not intend to inbound the ball to a teammate.