player control?

Originally Posted by fullor30

Not near rule book. Player on floor with ball firmly between legs. Player control?

Also reference # on player control. Thanks

Reading everyone's posts regarding this, I think there's a misunderstanding. This OP isn't clear, but I'm going to guess the question is regarding player control for the purpose of calling timeout. But I'll wait for the OP poster to come back and clarify his post.

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by Ref Ump Welsch

Reading everyone's posts regarding this, I think there's a misunderstanding. This OP isn't clear, but I'm going to guess the question is regarding player control for the purpose of calling timeout. But I'll wait for the OP poster to come back and clarify his post.

I understood the OP. The player can't call TO because he/she doesn't have PC because he/she has violated.

Originally Posted by jdw3018

I understood the OP. The player can't call TO because he/she doesn't have PC because he/she has violated.

Violated how? It isn't an intentional striking of the leg like some suggest. What if he was on the floor and the ball dropped into the legs? That's why I said the original OP isn't clear.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by jdw3018

I understood the OP. The player can't call TO because he/she doesn't have PC because he/she has violated.

Sure he can, the ball is now dead and anyone can request a TO.

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Sure he can, the ball is now dead and anyone can request a TO.

Touche.

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by Ref Ump Welsch

Violated how? It isn't an intentional striking of the leg like some suggest. What if he was on the floor and the ball dropped into the legs? That's why I said the original OP isn't clear.

I believe - and have been taught - that holding the ball between the legs is a violation. If the ball just dropped onto the legs, that's neither control nor a violation, same as if the ball landed on a player's back.

The only way a player can have player control is to be legally holding the ball or dribbling.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by jdw3018

And I believe it fits that description. It may be a light strike, but it's a strike.

Disagree. The rule clearly states that to be a kick the player must intentionally strike the ball with the leg or foot. Leg strikes ball.

The ball "striking" or otherwise contacting the leg (lightly or otherwise) is not a kick, absent a ruling to the contrary from NFHS.

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by mbyron

Disagree. The rule clearly states that to be a kick the player must intentionally strike the ball with the leg or foot. Leg strikes ball.

The ball "striking" or otherwise contacting the leg (lightly or otherwise) is not a kick, absent a ruling to the contrary from NFHS.

I've stated my opinion - a player intentionally holding the ball between his/her legs has struck the ball.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by jdw3018

I've stated my opinion - a player intentionally holding the ball between his/her legs has struck the ball.

What would you have in my post #15 in this thread?

[OHBBREF]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

What I'm saying is that kicking the ball is defined as intentionally striking it. Squeezing the ball between your legs is NOT striking.

OHBBREF, if you think that NCAA and NFHS rules are the same except for the shot clock, you're sadly mistaken.

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Are you talking specifically about the rules for kicking violations? If not, you couldn't be more wrong.

FED RULE
Rule 9
SECTION 4 TRAVEL, KICK, FIST
A player shall not travel with the ball, as in 4-44, intentionally kick it, as in 4-29, strike it with the fist or cause it to enter and pass through the basket from below.
NOTE: Kicking the ball is a violation only when it is an intentional act; accidentally striking the ball with the foot or leg is not a violation.

FED definition
Rule 4
SECTION 29 KICKING THE BALL
Kicking the ball is intentionally striking it with any part of the leg or foot.


NCAA RULE
Rule 9
Section 6
A Player shall not travel or with the ball, intentionally kick it, strike it with the fist or cause it to pass through the basket and enter the cylinder from below.
NCAA Definition
Rule 4
Section 45
Art 1 kicking the ball is striking it intentionally with any part of the leg or the foot
Art 2 Accidentally stricking the ball with the foot or leg shall not be a violation.

NCAA Case Play
Kicking the Ball
A.R. 104. A1 is on the floor with the ball lodged between the upper part
of the legs. B1 attempts to gain possession of the ball by placing
two hands firmly on the ball; however, A1 applies vice-like
force with the upper legs, which prevents B1 from gaining possession
of the ball.
RULING: A1 has committed a kicking violation. Kicking the ball is
defined as striking the ball intentionally with any part of the leg. The
intent of this rule is to prevent a player from gaining an advantage by
using any part of the leg. Since A1 was not holding the ball in his or
her hands, B1’s firm placement of his or her hands on the ball does
not constitute a held ball.
(Rule 4-45)


Where are the differences?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by OHBBREF

Where are the differences?

That's why i asked if you were talking specifically about kicking rules, or about all the rules in general being identical except for the shot clock. The way your post was worded, you were speaking of all the rules; but the context of the thread made me think maybe you were talking about kicking only. Thanks for clarifying.

[OHBBREF]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

That's why i asked if you were talking specifically about kicking rules, or about all the rules in general being identical except for the shot clock. The way your post was worded, you were speaking of all the rules; but the context of the thread made me think maybe you were talking about kicking only. Thanks for clarifying.

see your point- sorry if I confused anyone!

[OHBBREF]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Just to play devil's advocate:
B5 is standing still with his back to the play (guarding A5) when the ball comes flying from the backcourt, bounces right behind him, and gets lodged between his legs due to no effort or movement from him.

If the player allows the ball to drop to the floor immediately and noone else is trying to gain control of the ball I got nothing however if the player grabs the ball from between the legs or moves in any direction with one foot I have a kick. Because either of the other actions requires control of the ball.

[Fritz]

I would suspect that additional replies will not change jwd's opinion, but I think there is insufficient detail in the OP to reasonably offer an interpretation. Possible scenarios:

1) loose ball and during scramble A1 secures the ball between his legs with his hands. Even though his hands are on the ball are you really going to call a kicking violation? I'm not.
2) similar to #1, A1 now takes his hands off the ball to signal for a TO; NOW you are going to call a kicking violation? That would be a tough sell in my opinion.
3) OK, how about A1 has the ball lodged between his legs during the scramble but is prevented from reaching his hands down to the ball because...........B1 is holding him? PF on B1 right?
4) Wait, how about this one............A1 is trying to secure the ball with his legs while laying on the floor and intentionally not use his hands? Yes, I could see that in this sitch, A1 would actually "intentionally strike" the ball in trying to secure the possession. In that case, I agree with jwd, kicking violation.

I am sure I missed a couple of other possibilities.............

[OHBBREF]

Originally Posted by Fritz

Possible scenarios:

1) loose ball and during scramble A1 secures the ball between his legs with his hands. Even though his hands are on the ball are you really going to call a kicking violation? I'm not.

have to see this one but if the player has hands on the ball they can control it that way, might not be a kick.

Originally Posted by Fritz

2) similar to #1, A1 now takes his hands off the ball to signal for a TO; NOW you are going to call a kicking violation? That would be a tough sell in my opinion.

How is this a tough sell?
Player is not required to signal time out -they can say it.
By allowing the player to hold the ball with the legs - which is not control - and signal time out, if you grant it you have given them an advantage. Clearly a kick.

Originally Posted by Fritz

3) OK, how about A1 has the ball lodged between his legs during the scramble but is prevented from reaching his hands down to the ball because...........B1 is holding him? PF on B1 right?

Which happened first? if the ball is between the players legs you may have a violation before you have a foul?

Originally Posted by Fritz

4) Wait, how about this one............A1 is trying to secure the ball with his legs while laying on the floor and intentionally not use his hands? Yes, I could see that in this sitch, A1 would actually "intentionally strike" the ball in trying to secure the possession. In that case, I agree with jwd, kicking violation.

Trying means intentional. so contact with the legs is would be a kick.

If you use your legs to try to control the ball it is a kick it isn't that hard.