legal or illegal dribble

[just another ref]

Another factor one may or may not wish to consider: By rule, advantage/disadvantage is not involved in what is or is not a violation. But, in reality, it is a consideration in some cases. I see no possible advantage to be gained by a player placing the ball on the floor and retrieving it. This would make me even less likely to call this a violation.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by just another ref

By rule, advantage/disadvantage is not involved in what is or is not a violation.

Which rule? If it's Rule 11, then I'm missing a few pages out of my NFHS Rulebook. But I did find this on page 10 of my NFHS Rulebook: The Intent And Purpose Of The Rules: It is important to know the intent and purpose of a rule so that it may be intelligently applied in each play situation. A player of a team should not be permitted an advantage which is not intended by a rule. Neither should play be permitted to develop which may lead to placing a player at a disadvantage not intended by a rule."

All three of the statements refer to "rules". The word "foul" isn't mentioned, not even once. Rules include both fouls, and violations.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Which rule? If it's Rule 11, then I'm missing a few pages out of my NFHS Rulebook. But I did find this on page 10 of my NFHS Rulebook: The Intent And Purpose Of The Rules: It is important to know the intent and purpose of a rule so that it may be intelligently applied in each play situation. A player of a team should not be permitted an advantage which is not intended by a rule. Neither should play be permitted to develop which may lead to placing a player at a disadvantage not intended by a rule."

All three of the statements refer to "rules". The word "foul" isn't mentioned, not even once. Rules include both fouls, and violations.

Billy, he means that for fouls, advantage/disadvantage is explicitly written into the definition. It is not part of the definition of violations.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Billy, he means that for fouls, advantage/disadvantage is explicitly written into the definition. It is not part of the definition of violations.

Are you referring to incidental contact? If so, you make a good point. However, I have never found anything in writing that excludes violations from advantage/disadvantage, intent and purpose, or the Tower Philosophy. If you can find something, in writng, that excludes violations, such as three seconds, or a ten second count on a freethrow shooter, from these principles, then please post it.