another off the wall study guide question
 

A1 receives a pass standing still with both feet on the floor. He places the ball on the floor and releases it simultaneously with both hands. (WHY???)

He then picks the ball up and starts a dribble. Ruling: Legal play.

uh.....true?........maybe......weird.....definitel y

To tie his shoe?

4-15-3

I agree - legal, but I have to break it down. See if this logic works:
Caught a pass; (no pivot foot yet, thinking in my head).
Touches ball to the floor - legal
releases ball while touching floor; both hands simultaneously... okay, does not meet the definition of starting a dribble. (i agree WHY??? tied his shoe?)
Picks up the ball and starts a dribble- if there has been no dribble; seems legal

The ball was placed on the floor. This, to me, would not be the same as
"......pushing, throwing, or batting the ball to the floor...."

Let's change it a bit...A1 catches the ball with both feet off the floor. He places the ball on the floor as in the OP, ties his shoe then lands on both feet.

Can he now pick up the ball & dribble?

He doesn't need to dribble. He's Superman.

I think the interpretation of the player placing the ball on the ground and letting go is that of an interupted dribble (4-15-5) but I'm not sure it meets the criteria (i.e., deflecting off the dribbler (he placed it there) or getting away from the dribbler (again - it didn't get away, he placed it there)). If it is an interupted dribble they can pick it up and dribble after it as stated in the case.

I thought you were asking a question so I just gave you a rule to help you answer your own question.

But I guess I should've worded it this way:

He then picks the ball up and starts a dribble. Ruling: Legal play.

4-15-3 contains the answer to why the play is legal.

If it is an interrupted dribble, he cannot pick it up and dribble.

I was thinking his last job was as an extra in Crouching Tiger but Superman works

:p

I'm confused then (granted, not an unusual occurance). 4-12-1 states that there is "no player control ... during an interupted dribble." 4-15-5 says essentially the same thing. If there was player control, then none, how come they cannot pick it up?

Damned if I know - I'd be too busy picking my jaw up off the floor first.

My guess is he can, because of 4-15(NOTES)3.

He can pick it up. A player can always recover his/her own fumble. However, if that player has already dribbled, he/she may not dribble again.

So the rule to support that would be 9-5-3 because it hasn't touched another player?

How does that fit with the result of the original case presented?