Double Dribble???

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Ch1town

Not trying to nit pick, just want to understand this. Beginning a dribble by batting the ball to the playing surface isn't batting the ball in the air. I think we're discussing two different situations here.

Ummm calling Nevada come in Nevada...

The space between his hand and his heel would be considered "air", correct?

It's still a situation in which is A1 has already begun his dribble and he touches the ball twice with either hand before it strikes the floor. That's what makes it an illegal dribble.

But as I asked before, how many of us would call a violation in this situation? I don't know that I would, especially with how fast the play happened.

Still don't get it... casebook play perhaps?
Out of curiousity is there any rule support to have an interupted dribble?


At any rate, I won't be making that call. Play on player!

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Ch1town

1)Still don't get it... casebook play perhaps?

2) Out of curiousity is there any rule support to have an interrupted dribble?

Citing NFHS rules but NCAA rules are the same.....

1) Casebook play 4.15.4SitD(a)-- violation because ball was touched twice in the air during the dribble before the ball touched the floor.

2) Imo, no. The ball was never loose nor nor did it get away from the dribbler, and the dribbler also never lost player control. Iow, it doesn't meet the definition of an "interrupted dribble" under rule 4-15-5

[Lcubed48]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

But I'm probably with you concerning "Play on..."; I would file this under "obscure rulings". It was the first EVER I saw this happen. Which of course means it will happen again next month when I go to a D3 camp.

Which camp will you be attending - the D3 Super Camp in Richmond? If so, then maybe we'll be working together and get the call correct!

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Lcubed48

Which camp will you be attending - the D3 Super Camp in Richmond? If so, then maybe we'll be working together and get the call correct!

Yes sir, about an hour's drive from my house.

[Lcubed48]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Yes sir, about an hour's drive from my house.

Well then sir, I shall see you there. I'm 15 to 20 minutes from the campus. Look me up! Actually, there will be 3 or 4 of us who visit this site that will be attending the camp.

[JRutledge]

Yea...siiiiiirrrrrrr.

Peace

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

The space between his hand and his heel would be considered "air", correct?

It's still a situation in which is A1 has already begun his dribble and he touches the ball twice with either hand before it strikes the floor. That's what makes it an illegal dribble.

But as I asked before, how many of us would call a violation in this situation? I don't know that I would, especially with how fast the play happened.

I disagree...."into the air" is not referring to the general dribble but a specific action of batting the ball upwards during a dribble. To fully grasp this, you must go back to the beginning of the game and follow how the rules changed. In the beginning, a player was only allowed to run if they were not holding the ball. There were no specifics on how they could move beyond just that they could not hold the ball. So, the dribble was "invented". Some clever chap figured out that he could do what was referred to as an "air dribble"...repeatedly batting the ball up without ever letting it hit the floor. This was ultimately viewed as unfair and it led the to rule requiring that the ball hit the floor after being batted the ball into the air. So, a player dribbling down the floor, can still, if they so wish, bat the ball upwards with the hand under the ball as long as it hits the floor before the next dribble.

Assuming my assertion is true leads to the implication that there is nothing in the rule that categorically prohibits touching the ball with both hands on the same dribble. The rules only prohibit touching the ball with both hands simultaneously (ends the dribble). It would be legal for a player to push the ball towards the floor with one hand and then deflect the ball with the other hand as long as both hands were both in contact with the ball at the same time.

As for this case, I'm calling it an interrupted dribble if there is any question. It was only a matter of luck that it came to a position where he could continue the dribble. The interruption was very short but it did deflect off the dribbler (just to a convenient position).

[cmathews]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

I disagree...."into the air" is not referring to the general dribble but a specific action of batting the ball upwards during a dribble. To fully grasp this, you must go back to the beginning of the game and follow how the rules changed. In the beginning, a player was only allowed to run if they were not holding the ball. There were no specifics on how they could move beyond just that they could not hold the ball. So, the dribble was "invented". Some clever chap figured out that he could do what was referred to as an "air dribble"...repeatedly batting the ball up without ever letting it hit the floor. This was ultimately viewed as unfair and it led the to rule requiring that the ball hit the floor after being batted the ball into the air. So, a player dribbling down the floor, can still, if they so wish, bat the ball upwards with the hand under the ball as long as it hits the floor before the next dribble.

Assuming my assertion is true leads to the implication that there is nothing in the rule that categorically prohibits touching the ball with both hands on the same dribble. The rules only prohibit touching the ball with both hands simultaneously (ends the dribble). It would be legal for a player to push the ball towards the floor with one hand and then deflect the ball with the other hand as long as both hands were both in contact with the ball at the same time.

As for this case, I'm calling it an interrupted dribble if there is any question. It was only a matter of luck that it came to a position where he could continue the dribble. The interruption was very short but it did deflect off the dribbler (just to a convenient position).

so following this logic, I can tap the ball with my right hand, then my left hit my left thigh, bouncing it up into the air again to my right hand, down to my right toe back up to the right hand then to the floor all the while moving down the floor.......ummmmmm I don't think so....it is illegal to touch the ball with each hand before it touches the floor....

[Adam]

Originally Posted by cmathews

....it is illegal to touch the ball with each hand before it touches the floor....

...or twice with one hand.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by cmathews

so following this logic, I can tap the ball with my right hand, then my left hit my left thigh, bouncing it up into the air again to my right hand, down to my right toe back up to the right hand then to the floor all the while moving down the floor.......ummmmmm I don't think so....it is illegal to touch the ball with each hand before it touches the floor....

No, that would be a kick....intentionally contacting the ball with the leg or foot.

[Back In The Saddle]

An interrupted dribble occurs when the ball is loose after deflecting off the dribbler or after it momentarily gets away from the dribbler. There is no player control during an interrupted dribble. (NFHS)

Notice there are two independent clauses here: "the ball is loose after deflecting off the dribbler" and "after it momentarily gets away from the dribbler". They are separated by "or" which indicates that either situation is sufficient to qualify as an interrupted dribble. To argue that it's not an interrupted dribble because the ball didn't "[get] away from the dribbler" is to ignore the other clause.

In the OP is the ball not "loose after deflecting off the dribbler"? The ball is not being held by any player, and is loose in that sense. It's also not under the player's direct control since it did not go to the floor where it was clearly intended to go. In that sense it is loose too. Loose does not imply any specific or minimum distance from the dribbler. Nor does loose imply any duration. Deflecting does imply some amount of change in direction of the ball, but doesn't imply a minimum amount. However, I submit that in the OP the ball deflected roughly 180 degrees from its original path, which was toward the floor.

For my money, this is an interrupted dribble as the ball was loose after deflecting off the dribbler, even though the result of the deflection was nearly the same as if it had hit the floor and he was able to get it back under control and continue his dribble seemingly without missing a beat.

[cmathews]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Originally Posted by cmathews
so following this logic, I can tap the ball with my right hand, then my left hit my left thigh, bouncing it up into the air again to my right hand, down to my right toe back up to the right hand then to the floor all the while moving down the floor.......ummmmmm I don't think so....it is illegal to touch the ball with each hand before it touches the floor....

No, that would be a kick....intentionally contacting the ball with the leg or foot.

where does it say that any of the contact with the leg or foot was intentional?????

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Citing NFHS rules but NCAA rules are the same.....

1) Casebook play 4.15.4SitD(a)-- violation because ball was touched twice in the air during the dribble before the ball touched the floor.

2) Imo, no. The ball was never loose nor nor did it get away from the dribbler, and the dribbler also never lost player control. Iow, it doesn't meet the definition of an "interrupted dribble" under rule 4-15-5

This is the correct ruling. The action of that player was an illegal dribble.

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

I disagree...."into the air" is not referring to the general dribble but a specific action of batting the ball upwards during a dribble.

That is correct, and the action is allowed provided that it meets certain conditions.

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

To fully grasp this, you must go back to the beginning of the game and follow how the rules changed. In the beginning, a player was only allowed to run if they were not holding the ball. There were no specifics on how they could move beyond just that they could not hold the ball. So, the dribble was "invented". Some clever chap figured out that he could do what was referred to as an "air dribble"...repeatedly batting the ball up without ever letting it hit the floor. This was ultimately viewed as unfair and it led the to rule requiring that the ball hit the floor after being batted the ball into the air. So, a player dribbling down the floor, can still, if they so wish, bat the ball upwards with the hand under the ball as long as it hits the floor before the next dribble.

Also correct and well explained. The "air dribble" was banned as if done by a tall player it did not give a short player a fair opportunity to make a play on the ball.

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Assuming my assertion is true leads to the implication that there is nothing in the rule that categorically prohibits touching the ball with both hands on the same dribble. The rules only prohibit touching the ball with both hands simultaneously (ends the dribble). It would be legal for a player to push the ball towards the floor with one hand and then deflect the ball with the other hand as long as both hands were both in contact with the ball at the same time.

COMPLETE RUBBISH!!!
You just wrote above that a rule requires that a player must allow the ball to strike the floor after batting it into the air during a dribble. Touching it again prior to that would constitute an "air dribble" which you just noted was illegal. I cannot figure out how you could logically come to such a conclusion given what you stated immediately prior. Of course, your conclusion is incorrect.
Imagine a player attempting to split a double-team by using a variant of a crossover dribble. The offensive player is dribbling with his right hand with two opposing players come to trap him. He sees this and turns to his left as the ball rebounds up from the floor to his right hand. He now shifts the ball across his belly to his left hand and dribbles on the other side of his body while stepping past the two defenders. Do you believe that move is legal?

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

As for this case, I'm calling it an interrupted dribble if there is any question. It was only a matter of luck that it came to a position where he could continue the dribble. The interruption was very short but it did deflect off the dribbler (just to a convenient position).

Fortunate or not, the action was illegal since the ball did not strike the floor prior to being touched again. See the casebook play cited by Jurassic. I'd call this a violation everytime. It is not within the discretion of an official to not call a clear violation of the rules simply because he believes that the situation was strange.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

COMPLETE RUBBISH!!!
You just wrote above that a rule requires that a player must allow the ball to strike the floor after batting it into the air during a dribble. Touching it again prior to that would constitute an "air dribble" which you just noted was illegal. I cannot figure out how you could logically come to such a conclusion given what you stated immediately prior. Of course, your conclusion is incorrect.

No, touching it again is not what makes it an air dribble...the direction of the bat (upwards) makes it an air dribble.

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Imagine a player attempting to split a double-team by using a variant of a crossover dribble. The offensive player is dribbling with his right hand with two opposing players come to trap him. He sees this and turns to his left as the ball rebounds up from the floor to his right hand. He now shifts the ball across his belly to his left hand and dribbles on the other side of his body while stepping past the two defenders. Do you believe that move is legal?

No, that would be a carry.

The limits of what I think might be feasably executable under my suggestion are very narrow....mostly to make the point that two contacts with the ball don't automatically mean it is an illegal dribble. It can mean that...perhaps in most cases...but not automatic.

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Fortunate or not, the action was illegal since the ball did not strike the floor prior to being touched again. See the casebook play cited by Jurassic. I'd call this a violation everytime. It is not within the discretion of an official to not call a clear violation of the rules simply because he believes that the situation was strange.

Show me where it is required that an interrupted dribble is required to hit the floor. If it is ruled an interrupted dribble, the requirements of a dribble are suspended. A ball must only be "loose" after deflecting off the dribbler to be considered interrupted. We certainly have a deflection. As for "loose", show me a definition that excludes this case. I'm going to consider the ball loose ever so briefly when it deflects off of a part of a player's body when such contact was not intended.

The case Jurrsassic cited is, unfortunately, not actually supported by anything in the rules. The only thing in the rules regarding two hands is qualified with the term simultaneous. It is the general case that two hands touching the ball (with no regard to the timing of the touches) will be an illegal dribble but it is not the precise rule.