Jump ball or Travel

[Johnny Ringo]

Strange play: Player A is an airborne shooter, the defender comes from behind a touches (more like grazes) the ball. The ball never came dislodged, loose or at anytime did player A lose control.

Player A just held onto the ball and returned to the floor - he never shot it, bobbled it, nothing ...

The case book says if the defender keeps the shooter from releasing it is a jump ball, but I am not sure that defender was kept from releasing it. The shooter just never shot it.

Thoughts?

[just another ref]

Judgment call. If you feel the contact on the ball prevented the release, held ball. If you feel the shooter was simply confused/distracted by the contact, and this caused him to return to the floor, travel.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Judgment call. If you feel the contact on the ball prevented the release, held ball. If you feel the shooter was simply confused/distracted by the contact, and this caused him to return to the floor, travel.

Agreed, but the "benefit of the doubt" should go to the held ball call.

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Agreed, but the "benefit of the doubt" should go to the held ball call.

I agree, depending on the game situation.

[ILMalti]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Agreed, but the "benefit of the doubt" should go to the held ball call.

Sorry but I have to ask. How can this be a judgment call?

The rule is very very specific for held ball..
The OP description says that the ball was "grazed ,touched, ball never came dislodged, loose or at anytime did player A lose control."

In addition the OP states "The shooter just never shot it."


So where does the held ball rule come to play?

why complicate the call? Judgment calls lead to problems especially when a rule can be applied without any question

So using the above logic : a TRAVEL call only

Originally Posted by ILMalti

Sorry but I have to ask. How can this be a judgment call?

The rule is very very specific for held ball..
The OP description says that the ball was "grazed" ,touched, ball never came dislodged, loose or at anytime did player A lose control.

So where does the held ball rule come to play?

NOt a judgment call but a TRAVEL call only (no mention of a foul)

Really? How could this not be a judgment call

This thing we do is more of an Art than a Science & the rules are the guidelines which we go by. BUT there aren't any absolutes, always or automatics in what we do either

You never worked the MS game when one team is down by 40 & ignored their travel(s) or gave them all the 50/50 calls???

I would like to think that the good official uses his/her judgment each & every time they do/don't put air in the whistle!!

Know & understand the rules, their intent & how to apply them. But don't be a rulebook ref, be a people person who has a great feel for the game & try to make the right calls at the right times

[ILMalti]

Originally Posted by Ch1town

Really? How could this not be a judgment call

This thing we do is more of an Art than a Science & the rules are the guidelines which we go by. BUT there aren't any absolutes, always or automatics in what we do either

You never worked the MS game when one team is down by 40 & ignored their travel(s) or gave them all the 50/50 calls???

I would like to think that the good official uses his/her judgment each & every time they do/don't put air in the whistle!!

Know & understand the rules, their intent & how to apply them. But don't be a rulebook ref, be a people person who has a great feel for the game & try to make the right calls at the right times

No BB is not a "Art than a Science "; there are absolutes
The rule book was written many years ago and has not changed that much. The reason is that the rule covers the games in its entirety. Even our "judgment calls" are covered (ex incidental contact).

But to say that the rule should be "ignored" becasue a team is loosing is not right, The problem we have is that if you apply the intent of the rule one way and I apply it the other way, how can we excpect players coaches and audience to be consistant, One game a player is allowed to do "X" and in an other game they are not. The rules keep it all consitant.

I have been in a game which ended 100-2. I could not do much. The winning team coach kept on pressing, Not my place to tell him not too. The crowd and all did go wild when the loosing team scored their basket. I must admit I did smile.

All I am saying if we all understand the rules and apply them then we will all have a consitant call , and players, coaches etc will not complain.

"Over the back comes to mind" No such rule or call. But the minute coaches and players see someone who happens to be very tall put their head over a short player ... the calls start and some refs call it....

Understanding the rules is not easy, and I am not saying I know them. All I am saying is if we apply the rules consistantly with out our "ART" side the game will be consistant. We are not there to judge the game but to make sure the rules are followed.

See post to SNAGWELLS

[Adam]

Originally Posted by ILMalti

Sorry but I have to ask. How can this be a judgment call?

The rule is very very specific for held ball..
The OP description says that the ball was "grazed ,touched, ball never came dislodged, loose or at anytime did player A lose control."

In addition the OP states "The shooter just never shot it."


So where does the held ball rule come to play?

why complicate the call? Judgment calls lead to problems especially when a rule can be applied without any question

So using the above logic : a TRAVEL call only

This is very much a judgment call, and you're basing your ruling on his judgment. He judged that the shot was not prevented by the contact, based on how he worded his post.

In a game, on this play, there is judgment involved. Just like there is judgment on whether contact against a shooter affects a shot, or if it is incidental.

[ILMalti]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

This is very much a judgment call, and you're basing your ruling on his judgment. He judged that the shot was not prevented by the contact, based on how he worded his post.

In a game, on this play, there is judgment involved. Just like there is judgment on whether contact against a shooter affects a shot, or if it is incidental.

What would have constituted a "held ball" in your mind, the "graze" from behind?

Travel

[ILMalti]

Originally Posted by Johnny Ringo

Strange play: Player A is an airborne shooter, the defender comes from behind a touches (more like grazes) the ball. The ball never came dislodged, loose or at anytime did player A lose control.

Player A just held onto the ball and returned to the floor - he never shot it, bobbled it, nothing ...

The case book says if the defender keeps the shooter from releasing it is a jump ball, but I am not sure that defender was kept from releasing it. The shooter just never shot it.

Thoughts?

The rule for held ball is very specific.

4.25.2 states

An opponent places his/her hand on the ball and prevents an airborne player from throwing the ball or releasing it on a try


Since your description says "touches (more like grazes) the ball. The ball never came dislodged, loose or at anytime did player " then there could only be ONE call according to Rule 4.25

TRAVEL as per 4.44.3b