legal or illegal dribble

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by Back In The Saddle

It is traveling only because in this specific scenario the rules committee basically punted, called it traveling, and put it in the case book.

It's traveling because the player's action is a deliberate attempt to evade the traveling rule. So they include it as a separate "article" to the traveling rule.

[M&M Guy]

Ok, my head hurts less now.

Carry on.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

And then I could come back and say case play 4.44.5 SitB says there is a difference between the two. A player on the floor is allowed to stand up, as long as they are dribbling, but they are not allowed to place the ball on the floor, then stand, then be the first to touch it again. So, doesn't that say "placing the ball on the floor" is not the same as "dribbling"? Two distinct acts (dribbling vs. placing) while doing the same thing (standing up), where one is legal and one is a violation.

(Oh, crap, here comes my headache again...)

Yes, and it is a stupid ruling. The fact is that there is NO player control in this case.

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

Hey! You try and read 40 of these posts while your head hurts! It ain't easy!

(Besides, remember the old saying, "What have you done for me lately?" )

I think BITS and Scrappy covered it well by saying the committee was just trying to close a potential loophole in the traveling provisions, rather than expanding on player-control and dribbling definitions. I can't imagine they are really saying that setting the ball on the floor is the same as dribbling.

I agree with Scrapper here. The reason for the Case Book ruling is that the player is attempting to circumvent the rule.

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

It's traveling because the player's action is a deliberate attempt to evade the traveling rule. So they include it as a separate "article" to the traveling rule.