carrying and traveling

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by jefftuck

Yes, but that case specifically says that the ball is batted up into the air over an opponent. Then, in the discussion of the case, it says that it is illegal to touch the ball twice. Now, can you look at the answer or discussion and completely ignore the case that it was answering. Clearly, if the ball is batted up over an opponent, it is illegal to touch it again before it hits the floor. I'm not sure you can take the answer to this case and say that regardless of what the original question is, this answer says you can never touch it twice before it hits the floor (during a dribble).

Well, I tried.....

My advice is to take it to your association/state interpreter. Maybe you'll believe them.

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Well, I tried.....

My advice is to take it to your association/state interpreter. Maybe you'll believe them.

You should stick to being the in your face take no hostages evil prick. It suits you better.

More entertaining too.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Dan_ref

You should stick to being the in your face take no hostages evil prick. It suits you better.

More entertaining too.

Yeah, I guess. Why try to be something you're aren't?

Btw, shut up.

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Yeah, I guess. Why try to be something you're aren't?

Yeah. And while we're talking about giving up, glad to see you've given up on the English language.

[Back In The Saddle]

Originally Posted by Dan_ref

You should stick to being the in your face take no hostages evil prick. It suits you better.

More entertaining too.

He sent his super villian/evil genius costume to the dry cleaners, and they lost it!

The whole in your face thing just doesn't play if he's not wearing the cape and the shiny knee-high boots.

[just another ref]

In his defense, other than the above mentioned case play, how can we tell it is a violation to touch the ball with one hand followed by the other before it hits the floor? This play deals specifically with batting the ball over the head of the opponent. I understand his confusion.

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by just another ref

In his defense, other than the above mentioned case play, how can we tell it is a violation to touch the ball with one hand followed by the other before it hits the floor? This play deals specifically with batting the ball over the head of the opponent. I understand his confusion.

What part makes it confusing? Is it the part where the ball goes over the head of an opponent? Would the same action be legal if there was no opponent standing there?

[BillyMac]

Palming or carrying is when a player gains an advantage when the ball comes to rest in the player's hand, and the player either travels with the ball, or dribbles a second time. There is no restriction as to how high a player may bounce the ball, provided the ball does not come to rest in a player’s hand. Steps taken during a dribble are not traveling, including several that are sometimes taken when a high dribble takes place. It is not possible for a player to travel during a dribble.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

...It is not possible for a player to travel during a dribble.

Working a GV regional the other evening at another's district's school. The "R" is from home team's association. The visiting team is from my association. Visiting HC complains to crew chief looking for a travel.

HC: "she travelled when she was dribbling"
R: "well, if she was dribbling how could she travel?"
HC: (flustered) "That's not what I meant!"

Crew chief said she was lending a sympathetic ear until that exchange. I could only laugh. In the same game this HC tells the U2 (from my assoc.) that he needs to let the girls play. Then 3 or 4 plays later I'm in front of the HC and he starts complaining for me not to "swallow my whistle".

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

What part makes it confusing? Is it the part where the ball goes over the head of an opponent? Would the same action be legal if there was no opponent standing there?

Why is this not a part of 9-5-3? Does it say in either book that the second touch is a violation other than the references to batting the ball in the air or over the opponent's head?

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Why is this not a part of 9-5-3? Does it say in either book that the second touch is a violation other than the references to batting the ball in the air or over the opponent's head?

I don't think so. But it does say it there, right?

Perhaps they put the reference in the definitions because they felt it had to do with what you can and cannot do during a dribble.

At least they didn't put it in Rule 1 - Court and Equipment, right?

[JoeTheRef]

Originally Posted by just another ref

In his defense, other than the above mentioned case play, how can we tell it is a violation to touch the ball with one hand followed by the other before it hits the floor? This play deals specifically with batting the ball over the head of the opponent. I understand his confusion.

The case play deals with batting the ball over the head of the opponent, but the ruling SPECIFICALLY states the violation.... Violation in (a) because the ball was touched twice by A1's hand(s) during a dribble, before it touched the floor (period).