![]() |
Double Dribble???
I was on the sideline the other day during pick-up ball and the following play happened:
A1 (about 6'4" with extremely long arms) grabs a long rebound and starts to dribble to push the ball up the court. His first dribble is with his right hand then on the 2nd dribble he attempts to dribble behind his back from his right hand to his left hand but the ball his left heel and comes straight up behind him. He reaches back with his left hand (remember his long arms?) and continues his dribble without missing a beat. Is this a double dribble? One of my buddies on the sideline immediately turned to me and asked the question and I didn't have an answer for him. I haven't gone to check the rulebooks yet. |
Pretty sure it's an "illegal dribble," but I'll have to check my book for the rule reference.
|
I guess by NCAA rule 4-21 it would be a illegal/double dribble:
Art. 3. During a dribble, the ball may be batted into the air, provided that it is permitted to strike the playing court one or more times before the ball is touched again with either hand. So my question is how many of us would have called it in a real game? And say a player is just standing still dribbling the ball and one of his/her dribbles went off the top of his/her foot and they continued to dribble. Would we call a double/illegal dribble? |
Not understanding this guys :confused:
When did A1s dribble end? |
Quote:
Art. 3. During a dribble, the ball may be batted into the air, provided that it is permitted to strike the playing court one or more times before the ball is touched again with either hand. |
With all due respect, that rule is about "batting a ball in the air" during a dribble.
I didn't see where that had anything to do with your OP :confused: I was under the impression that he dribbled once, went behind the back (give it to a guard) & the ball hit his heel, then he just continued the dribble :confused: |
Quote:
4-21.Art. 1. A dribble is ball movement caused by a player in control who bats, pushes or taps the ball to the playing court once or several times. |
Quote:
Ummm calling Nevada come in Nevada... |
Quote:
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! |
Quote:
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). |
Quote:
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 |
Quote:
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.... |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
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. :confused: 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? Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
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. Quote:
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. |
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. |
Quote:
Quote:
Yes, this is specified in the case play, but I would like to see it mentioned in the rule book as well. |
Quote:
A1 is being guarded by B1. A1 has just received a pass and has yet to dribble. A1 throws the ball UPWARDS over B1's head and runs around him. The ball is allowed to strike the floor and A1 catches it. Legal or not? Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
The illegal touching could be done by one hand. A player could push the ball downward and forward with his right hand, but then quickly reach out with the same hand and deflect the ball to the side or pull it back to him before it contacts the floor. That movement is illegal as well. I have no idea why you are attempting to confuse the issue with terms such as "general case" and "precise rule." The dribble is either illegal or it isn't. That's all. |
Okay, the case play is quite clear. Violation
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Do you, when a player is dribbling ensure that the dribbling hand maintains continuous contact with the ball? By your argument, it would be a violation if the ball ever had so much as a brief seperation from the hand. |
1. Good we agree that upward movement does not mean that the dribble is illegal. The example that I posed refutes your earlier statement about an "air dribble." Can we now agree that touching the ball again before it reaches the floor is the proper definition of an "air dribble?"
This is really as far as we should need to go as all other plays could be decided based upon that premise. 2. No, the ball need not be batted into the air. The player could simply knock the ball directly across his body to his other hand after it rebounds up from the floor. 3. You missed the point. The action is still DURING A DRIBBLE. The batting into the air just allows more time for the events to unfold. The case book clearly tells you that a player cannot touch the ball twice while it is in the air DURING A DRIBBLE before it strikes the floor. How high or how long the ball is in flight does not matter. To believe so is illogical and to attempt to put such restrictions upon play would be impossible. 4. As an official must observe the action and make decisions, I do not believe that my causality is backwards. An official watching the dribbler must determine if the ball escaped the control of a player. If the officials deems that to have occurred then there was a loss of player control. An official must first decide that the ball got away from the player before thinking that an interrupted dribble has occurred. 5. What rule? Try this one. 4-15 describes the legal movement of a dribble. If the action does not meet the provided definition then it is either an illegal dribble or not a dribble at all. 6. If you are saying that a player cannot allow a dribble to come up and contact his hand, have the ball separate from that hand, and then reach out and contact the ball again, then you are correct. That is an illegal dribble. How small of a separation do I watch for? I call the obvious. |
Quote:
Quote:
It's a matter of direction, even intent. There are certain actions intended to circumvent the basic rules that are, by interpretation, considered to be a violations. A ball that brushes a 2nd hand on the way to the floor is not one of them. That is not the intent and purpose of the rule....certainly not hitting a foot on the floor. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
1. You keep referring to an inadvertant touch, while I have clearly stated intentional. Accidental contact has nothing to do with this situation, so please stop bringing it up in an attempt to confuse the issue.
2. Again rule 4-15 tells you HOW a player may dribble. If the player does not perform the ball movement in that described manner, then he is either dribbling illegally or not dribbling at all. What is listed in rule 9 is only one way that a player may violate. It is true that, and I have argued for this before, another article under 9-5 stating that it is also a violation to perform a dribble in an illegal manner would be wonderful, but since we don't have that we simply follow the play ruling from the case book under 4.15. 3. I'm not going to argue the sematics of player control any further. It is a judgment call anyway. 4. Test case: How do you rule on this play, let's call it a "double-crossover". A1 is dribbling with his right hand. As the ball rebounds from the floor to about the height of his waist he pushes the ball down diagonally towards his left knee. The ball is only in contact with his hand for a split second and does not come to rest. The ball moves through the air and comes near the player's left knee and he reaches out with his left hand and bats the ball diagonally downwards so that it strikes the floor near his right foot. During this action the defender B1 moves to his right following the first movement of the ball, but then is too slow to change direction and get back to his left as A1 changes the direction of the ball that way. A1 thus easily goes around B1 while continuing the dribble with his right hand. No carry/palming and no loss of player control occurred during the entire sequence. |
Quote:
After a player has batted/pushed the ball to start an individual dribble, that player can't touch the ball again with either hand until the ball hits the floor. If the player does so, it's a violation.That's been the rule.....oh....forever, and the definitive case book play has been around forever also. Waste of time arguing. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
Facts: There was a deflection before the second touch because the ball struck the defenders body. Judgment: Official 1: The ball momentarily got away & took a lucky bounce plus the player had long arms regaining control... interupted dribble?? Official 2: The defender made a great attemp to steal the around the back dribble so the dribbler intentionally kicked back at the ball to avoid getting ripped... kick?? Official 3: The ball was touched by the hand twice before striking the floor... violation?? I think all 3 decisions have a ruling to support them depending upon the judgement of the official & how the play unfolds. When it comes down judgement on a correct ruling the words: deflection momentarily loose are not clearly defined, well at least not to some of us. Court is in session... |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Imo it's a waste of time discussing a play that, to the best of my knowledge, has always been called only one way. Personally, I could care less what the non-believers think. Let 'em play the cunning linguist games. Hey, I really do hope that they do have the courage of their convictions and will not call a violation the next time that a player touches the ball again before it touches the floor after it left his hand on a dribble. That's fine with me. And ....... if somebody honestly thinks that an interrupted dribble can occur when the ball never got away from the dribbler and the dribbler also <b>IMMEDIATELY</b> continued to dribble without missing a beat, hey,that's fine with me too. Shrug. |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
What you suggest and claim may indeed be true...but the rules don't back you up without a lot of assumption and reading between the lines. |
Quote:
Learning can never be a waste of time, well maybe except for the person teaching :D But with the status comes the responsibility. If I pass on that call in a crucial situation & it affects the game... I blame you for not doing your duty. j/k I was really hoping you would address this part of my post - Facts: There was a deflection before the second touch because the ball struck the defenders body. Judgment: Official 1: The ball momentarily got away & took a lucky bounce plus the player had long arms regaining control... interupted dribble?? Official 2: The defender made a great attemp to steal the around the back dribble so the dribbler intentionally kicked back at the ball to avoid getting ripped... kick?? Official 3: The ball was touched by the hand twice before striking the floor... violation?? The spaces were left on purpose for you to address... |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Again, it may be the intent and standard to not allow two touches...but the book does NOT back that up. |
Quote:
(1) Violation, because the ball is touched twice during a dribble, before the ball touches the playing court. Which is the exact same verbiage used in the NFHS case book. (I'm sure Jurassic said the same thing earlier in this thread). The reason it is a violation is stated clearly. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
I think the second part of your post should be directed to a different poster, I fully concur with 2 touches prior to the ball striking the floor = violation (upward or downward). What happens in between the second touching is judgement IMO. My only issue is who's to say whether or not the ball striking the dribblers foot was an interupted dribble? Did it not strike the dribblers foot? After striking the foot did it not get away but favorably come back? It would be GREAT if they made a case play for this particular situation ie: During a dribble when the ball strikes the foot of the dribbler & returns to the players hands before striking the floor this should be ruled "a violation" OR "an interupted dribble" |
You're right, I was confusing the confusions. :confused:
We now return you to your regularly scheduled programming of inside jokes mixed with the occasional rules discussion. |
Quote:
The context being referred to is one where the ball is batted up (and, in this case, over an oppenents head). You can't simply ignore the context an apply the conclusion generally. If it was meant to apply generally, they wouldn't have created a context with an exception type of play. I'm sure you can find several rulings in the case book that, when taken out of context, lead to some interesting results. As for the rule, why the clause "into the air" if what you suggest is true. If it were meant to be generally true, it would be worded something like: During a dribble, the ball may only touch or be touched by the hand(s) once between bounces. But, it doesn't say that. |
Quote:
|
Camp?
Quote:
|
Quote:
Little background. Back in the 80's iirc, the FED put in an absolutely stoopid case book play. The ruling was that if a player lost control of his dribble, he wasn't allowed to go get the ball and dribble again if the ball wasn't touched by another player in between. That was true even if the player didn't end his original dribble while getting the loose ball. If he did dribble after getting the loose ball, it was an illegal second dribble. That lasted one year and they yanked it and replaced it with the wording that we use now. They also issued a second case book play that has disappeared over time. In both of the case plays, they defined an "interrupted dribble" as a player not being able to immediately dribble because the ball got away from them. Afaik, that's still how the play should be adjudicated. |
Quote:
|
Thanks for the breif history on the ruling of an interupted dribble JR! I guess one would have to know some of the old stuff to be current in todays ruling.
Sounds like an illegal dribble... I'll run the OP by some of the powers that be to see how they would rule. Thanks again |
Quote:
|
True dat!
|
Word.
|
Shutup.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
The more the merrier!
Quote:
|
Yea...siiiiiirrrrrrr.
Peace |
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:14am. |