Is this a carry?

[Adam]

Billy, my problem is that "palming" or "carry" does not require an advantage to be a violation; any more than OOB, traveling, or double dribble require an advantage. It's not like the definition of a foul, which requires some sort of advantage.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Billy, my problem is that "palming" or "carry" does not require an advantage to be a violation; any more than OOB, traveling, or double dribble require an advantage. It's not like the definition of a foul, which requires some sort of advantage.

THE INTENT AND PURPOSE OF THE RULES
The restrictions which the rules place upon the players are intended to create a
balance of play; to provide equal opportunity between the offense and the
defense; to provide equal opportunity between the small player and tall player; to
provide reasonable safety and protection; to create an atmosphere of sporting
behavior and fair play; and to emphasize cleverness and skill without unduly
limiting freedom of action of individual or team play on either offense or defense.
Therefore, 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 or 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. It is the policy of the NFHS

The 2009-10 NFHS Points of Emphasis use the word advantage four times in nonfoul situations:

The traveling rule has not changed; however, the committee is
still concerned that the rule is not being properly enforced. Consequently,
offensive players are gaining a tremendous advantage.

Well-officiated closely-guarded situations provide for
better balance between offense and defense. When the closely-guarded rules are
not followed, there is a significant advantage for the offense.

Another situation that is occurring more frequently, and which
is often not properly called, is when an offensive player sets a screen in
the lane and remains there for more than three seconds. The responsible
official must make sure that offensive players are not occupying restricted
positions for more than the permitted time. The offensive player gains an
unwarranted advantage if he or she can “camp out” in the lane, either as
a potential shooter or as a screener.

Players are attempting to gain a rebounding advantage
by violating the free-throw restrictions and entering the lane early. No
player shall enter, leave or touch the court outside the marked lane space
(3 feet by 3 feet). Officials must review and enforce the rules regarding
offensive and defensive free-throw violations.

[Adam]

Billy, my understanding of that particular passage is that it's used to prevent players from using loopholes to gain an advantage.

While the application of this particular rule sometimes hinges on an advantage, its definition does not include such wording. To me, a "myths" list should stick to the way the rule is written, and if you want to add a sentence on application, then advantage could be a part of that. Even then, I'd qualify by saying "in some areas, officials look for an advantage before calling it." Do you wait for an advantage before calling a travel? OOB? Illegal dribble? Backcourt violation?

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Do you wait for an advantage before calling a travel? OOB? Illegal dribble? Backcourt violation?

Sometimes, depending on the level.
No, never.
Almost never, depending on the level.
No, never.

Three seconds, yes.
Ten second free throw violation, yes, always.
Carrying, or palming, yes, most of the time, depending on the level.

[Adam]

Carrying and palming, I look for either an advantage or a really obvious carry.
Travel, never.
Illegal dribble, never.
Three seconds, usually; unless they start growing roots.
Ten seconds, not advantage so much as a really long time.
Five seconds, never.
OOB, never.
BC, never.

For none of these, however, does A/D play into the rule or definition; even if the official chooses not to call it.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Three seconds, yes.
Ten second free throw violation, yes, always.
Carrying, or palming, yes, most of the time, depending on the level.

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Carrying and palming, I look for either an advantage or a really obvious carry.
Travel, never.
Illegal dribble, never.
Three seconds, usually; unless they start growing roots.
Ten seconds, not advantage so much as a really long time.
Five seconds, never.
OOB, never.
BC, never.

Notice a theme running through these? Violations involving a boundary line, or a visible counting motion (exception for free throw), seem to be pretty much exempt from the advantage/disadvantage principle. We see them. We call them. No judgment needed. Not very subjective.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Notice a theme running through these? Violations involving a boundary line, or a visible counting motion (exception for free throw), seem to be pretty much exempt from the advantage/disadvantage principle. We see them. We call them. No judgment needed. Not very subjective.

Personally, I don't go A/D for travel or illegal dribble, either. Not at the high school level anyway.
10 seconds, 3 seconds, and palming are pretty much it; and palming to a much lower extend than the other two.