A pass is a pass, a shot is a shot...
 

In a previous thread Basketball has started... I discussed a situation where an obvious (front-court) pass ricochets off the rim into the backcourt and retrieved (untouched) by the offense. I corrected my partner who called this a backcourt violation and we gave the ball back to the offense.

After the discussion (on this board and with some esteemed local association members who do NCAA), I would not correct my partner if this happened again. I have come to the conclusion that a pass is a pass and a shot is a shot (pretty profound, huh?). If it's an obvious pass the shot clock would not reset so why would I not call a backcourt violation? I should call it.

However, that leads me to think about another situation if I use the profound finding that a "pass is a pass and a shot is a shot". A1 has a wide open break away dribbling towards his/her (I have to be politically correct, right? ;)) basket. A1 picks up their dribble with two hands (ends the dribble), passes the ball off the backboard (to themselves), takes a couple additional steps after the release of the ball, then jumps and dunks the ball. Yes, we are talking about the rim-rockin' alley oop to themselves :rolleyes: Shouldn't this be considered a pass to themselves and thus a violation?

I know I'm over thinking the situation and I need someone to set me straight on it. Thanks for being the ones to set me straight :o

-Josh

I think you'll find that almost all officials will consider this a try rather than "passing" the ball to yourself.

There are (or were) specific case plays in both FED and NCAA where this is legal.

Sometimes a pass is a dribble
 

Speaking from the Fed side only, a pass to yourself is not necessarily a violation. Of course, it is no longer a pass either, it generally becomes a dribble. And that dribble may or may not be an illegal dribble. As of the '08-'09 Case Book, it sometimes becomes a travel (that's a whole different discussion.)

I know in your OP you are referring to an alley-oop dunk. And, my statements do not address your OP. I just wanted to address the pass to yourself issue since it is currently a matter of great discussion in my Association. I didn't mean to hi-jack the thread. :o

I'm trying to understand why this would be legal. In any other circumstances a player who "passed to himself" and moved his pivot in order to get to the pass would have violated, right? Is this legal because the self passer dunks the ball before the pivot foot returns to the floor?

From last year's NCAA case book:
A.R. 108. A1 intercepts a pass and dribbles toward A’s basket for a break-away layup. Near A’s free throw line, A1 legally stops and ends his or her dribble. A1 throws the ball against A’s backboard and follows the throw. While airborne, A1 rebounds the ball off the backboard and dunks. RULING: The play shall be legal since the backboard is equipment located in A1’s half of the playing court, which A1 is entitled to use. (Rule 4-69.4)

The NFHS case book contains this, which does not address the player "following" the toss against the backboard:
9.5 SITUATION: A1 dribbles and comes to a stop after which he/she throws the ball against: (a) his/her own backboard; (b) the opponent’s backboard; or (c) an official and catches the ball after each. RULING: Legal in (a); a team’s own backboard is considered part of that team’s “equipment” and may be used. In (b) and (c), A1 has violated; throwing the ball against an opponent’s backboard or an official constitutes another dribble, provided A1 is first to touch the ball after it strikes the official or the board. (4-4-5; 4-15-2; Fundamental 19)

A ball thrown off the opponents backboard, or an official, is ruled to be a dribble. The same is not true of a player's own backboard, however.

This is an issue I have never really delved into. I'd appreciate any enlightenment in understanding the issues surrounding passing to yourself, which I have always understood to be a violation.

I can only attempt to extrapolate some logic.

Throwing the ball off one's own backboard is akin to throwing the ball off another player.

Throwing the ball off an official or the opponent's backboard is akin to throwing the ball to the floor.

IMO, this is only legal if you determine the throw to your own backboard to be a try. On this forum it is often said that throwing the ball against your own backboard is nothing. I agree. And therefore, if the throw is not determined to be a try, case 4.44.3D(b) applies and it would be a travel (an illegal dribble prior to '08-'09.)

So, I think it requires the throw to be deemed a try to be legal. And most here, are willing to call it a try. I am reluctantly calling it a try and hope I don't have to address it during a game.

My definition of "pass to yourself", a player who has control of the ball, intentionally loses control of the ball with an attempted pass and is the first to touch the pass which has not touched or been touched by another player.

Sitch 1: Player A has not dribbled. He makes a "pass to yourself" that (a) touches the floor before player A touches the ball or (b) does not touch the floor before player A touches the ball.

My Ruling: Legal in (a) as Player A has now started a dribble (4-15-1). When Player A touches the ball, he may continue to dribble it as in an interrupted dribble or he may secure it and be afforded all the legal moves afforded a player who ends their legal dribble. In (b) Travel as in 4.44.3D(b).

Sitch 2: Player A is dribbling. He scures his dribble and makes a "pass to yourself" that (a) touches the floor before player A touches the ball or (b) does not touch the floor before player A touches the ball.

My Ruling: Violation in (a) and (b). In (a) Player A has started a second dribble and therefore committed an illegal dribble 9-5-3. In (b) Player A has traveled as in 4.44.3D(b)

Without becoming more wordy, that is my effort at enlightenment. :) So it is not the "pass to yourself" that is illegal but the illegal dribble or travel that violates.

Hopefully it will start enough discussion to get it done.

Another pass/shot one that gets me --

A1 passes from outside the 3-point arc and the ball is deflected by B1 who is inside the 3-point arc; the deflection causes the ball to go into the hoop. Even though it was a pass, its still a 3 point field goal.

I don't seem to be the only one that is having trouble justifying this legal/illegal act. I can't rationalize these plays... :( BTW, I have called this an illegal dribble while I was in college. I was specifically told this act was illegal but I'm not leaning one way or another now. I, honestly, just don't know.

-Josh

Talked about at the NFHS forum recently


Ball against the backboard

I am changing my mind . . . hopefully for a better one!
 

I believe there are two ways for the alley-oop to be legal.

First, the pass off the backboard is a try. If it is judged to be a try, everyone knows why it is legal.

Second, if the player gathers the ball and establishes a pivot foot as in 4-44-3, the player can then release the ball on the pass before jumping off his non-pivot foot and dunking it.

I think case 4.44.3D(b) is considered a travel because the player (who has control and may establish a pivot foot) lifts both feet, restablishes the pivot foot and controls the ball again before it has touched or been touched by another player. This doesn't happen in the second situation above. The two actions allowed are a pass and a try. Both were done before either foot returned to the floor.

The release for the pass is legal and the neither foot returns to the floor until after the pass and try. If the player were to move his foot/feet in excess of the limits described in 4-44 it would be a travel as in 4.44.3D(b).

Someone help me decide if my logic is correct.

So if we're going to consider this play to be a try...

NFHS 4-41-3 "The try starts when the player begins the motion which habitually precedes the release of the ball."

and

NCAA 4-71.3 "The try shall start when the player begins the motion that habitually precedes the release of the ball on a try. The ball does not need to leave the player’s hand. The arm might be held so that the player cannot throw; however, he or she may be making an attempt."

So then I suppose the try begins when the player begins to his motion to gather the ball for the throw off of the glass? In which case any illegal contact against the "shooter" from that moment on is a shooting foul?

No...it is really two seperate tries....and there could be a foul on either one. Also, there is likely a gap between the two "tries" where A1 is not a shooter....after they have initially released the ball and are in contact with the floor and until the "rebound" the ball and start a new motion to shoot.

Thank you for making me aware for this thread. I don't know how I missed it, to be honest. Although, I don't stay as up-to-date on the NFHS board as well as I do this one.

With that said, I'm absolutely NOT trying to dig up ol' wounds and reopen them! I now accept that this play is legal!

But...What is a thrown ball considered (by rule) if it's judged to NOT be an attempt to score? To my knowledge (although limited) three things can be done with the ball, attempt a try, pass, and dribble.

So if a player throws the ball against the backboard without an attempt to score, it cannot be a try. My definition it cannot be a pass because a pass is moving the ball from one player to another player. And it seems as though it could not be a dribble (by examining the case play) because you can dribble, shuffle your feet, and do the hokey pokey after you throw it off the glass.

Consequently, when a player throws the ball off the glance is player and/or team control retained and/or lost? What is A1 in the lane throws the ball off the glass so hard that it goes untouched into the backcourt, can this be retrieved by Team A legally? Just some thoughts

-Josh

I'm still trying to wrap my head around this whole thing too, but...

Your list of things you can do with the ball is pretty limited. A player may also tap the ball, bat the ball, kick the ball, hold the ball, strike the ball with a fist. Those are also all actions recognized by rule. Keep in mind while the rules specifically disallow some actions (e.g., kicking), and formally define some others (e.g., dribbling), they do not constitute a comprehensive listing of all allowed actions. For instance, a player may simply abandon the ball, a discussion we've had at least once here. Throwing the ball off his own backboard, I think, falls into this same category. It is not prohibited (and, in fact, the case book says it is legal). It could be part of a pass, or a try (like the alley oop to himself in the OP), that is a judgment the official needs to make. But, if not, then it's...nothing we need to worry about. I suppose that means he could spend the entire quarter just bouncing the ball off the glass.

As for team and player control, those are well defined. If the player is not holding or dribbling a live ball inbounds, it's not in player control. However, team control is not lost until the ball is dead, a try, or a player of the other team secures control. So while the player is bouncing the ball off the glass, there is no player control but team control still exists. Unless you judge it to be a try.

If player A1 tosses the ball repeatedly off his/her own backboard while keeping his/her pivot foot in contact with the floor . . . it is legal.

Isn't this, "repeatedly off his/her own backboard", the same as "from one hand to the other" ? If so, and I believe it is, then 4.44.3D(a) tells us this is legal.

The difference between (a) and (b) in 4.44.3D is the pivot foot movement. That is why I have decided that as long as the foot/feet do not move in excess of the prescribed limits stated in 4-44-3, that is one way an alley-oop to yourself, off your own backboard, would be legal.

Like I said previously, I'm still trying to get my head around this one too...

48 hours ago, I would have agreed with you. However, it now appears to me that tossing the ball off your own backboard is ... nothing. The rules acknowledge it, and tell us a little about this activity (e.g., it is legal, it is not part of a dribble). But that's about all they say about it. Trying to fill that void by shoehorning this action into another rule which regulates a different activity is incorrect. You may as well argue that the thrower moving from the designated spot is traveling, it's the same (incorrect) logic.

Without posting all of the relevant text...
Traveling is moving beyond the prescribed limits while holding the ball. There is one exception, and that involves placing the ball on the floor while getting up.

Dribbling involves pushing the ball to the floor. The opponent's backboard is considered part of the floor for this purpose. One's own backboard is not. It is simply "equipment".

Passing involves another player, or at least the intent to throw the ball to another player.

And we acknowledge that we're not talking about a try.

So what does that leave? It leaves an activity that is not regulated by rule.

As for the "self alley oop"... the NCAA case book says this is legal and is a try. The NFHS case book does not actually say this, but there is a case situation that is close that is deemed legal. It is activity that is otherwise widely accepted to be legal. The rules do not prohibit it.

Camron has suggested that the "self alley oop" is actually two tries. I'm not convinced, but I have no basis for argument. I think the whole process of throwing it off the glass, catching, and dunking constitutes one play and is therefore all part of the same try. But I have no basis for my argument either.

My personal feeling on the whole subject? I'm putting away my shoehorn.

OK BITS, if your going to be like that, I'll put my shoehorn away too. Right after I say this: :D

I can't find (understand) anything illegal about the self alley-oop. If I ever have to call it, I will probably allow it. When asked by the opposing coach why it is legal, I will not respond with all of my shoehorning.

I will just say:

"Our Association has determined that is legal because the pass off the glass is judged to be a try." :cool:

That's probably better than my answer. Which would be, "Can you show me where the rules say it's not legal?" :D

Like I said, I'm still trying to get my head around this one. Most likely somebody will be by later today to point out the flaws in my thinking and argument. ;)

I have to guess the ruling is this way to take the onus off the referee of trying to determine intent.

If it hits the backboard, it's a shot: no team control, anybody can get the ball...it's a rebound..no travelling, etc

So do we have a consensus that if the ball is thrown against the backboard we would treat it as a shot and team control is lost?

-Josh

"consensus" is a pretty strong word for what I think we have here. :)

Consensus? Count the inmates in the prison?

Ok, bad choice of words. Would most of you consider a thrown ball off the backboard a try? So if a thrown ball goes into the backcourt, it would be legal for the offense to recover it untouched by the defense?

-Josh

Other than the "self alley oop", unless it appear to me to be an attempt to score I'm not counting it as a try. So if it goes untouched into backcourt, I'm paying particular attention to who is "first to touch".

JAR, that jape lands only if somebody misspells 'consensus'. :p

Yep, JAR is talking about a "concensus."

No to both questions.

It's not a try, not a dribble, not a pass. It's a "something else" with it's own set of rules.