Funny Vid / Palming-Carrying?

[Adam]

Carry/palming is, essentially, either a travel or a double dribble.

Does his hand get under the ball? Does he grasp it from above ("palming" it)? I didn't see either of those, so I'm not sure how you're seeing it. You're right, though, it's judgment.

[just another ref]

Note the wording in 4-15. For the sake of this argument there are two separate ways the dribble can end.

4-15-1

a. .....catches or causes the ball to come to rest in one or both hands.


b. ....palms/carries the ball by allowing it to come to rest in one or both hands.


I don't see where a could apply here. Not so sure about b. How long is too long? This guy goes basically all the way across the lane with the ball resting in his hand. Not saying I would or wouldn't call it, but I certainly think it is a legitimate point to ponder. If this guy had demonstrated the same move while adding a spin, I think a lot of us would call a violation.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Note the wording in 4-15. For the sake of this argument there are two separate ways the dribble can end.

4-15-1

a. .....catches or causes the ball to come to rest in one or both hands.


b. ....palms/carries the ball by allowing it to come to rest in one or both hands.


I don't see where a could apply here. Not so sure about b. How long is too long? This guy goes basically all the way across the lane with the ball resting in his hand. Not saying I would or wouldn't call it, but I certainly think it is a legitimate point to ponder. If this guy had demonstrated the same move while adding a spin, I think a lot of us would call a violation.

I think this is a very legitimate point. The problem is based on the descriptions that were shown of these kinds of plays show the hand being under or on the side of the ball (and moving it across the dribblers body). This did not look that way at all in my opinion. But it is something to think about as we need to often find the line of what we are going to allow. But this can never be traveling as suggested. It is only palming/carrying/double dribble violation if the player violated.

Peace

[Adam]

I disagree that it "couldn't" be traveling. If he, for example, takes about 6 steps with the ball resting in his hand and never re-dribbles, it's traveling. Before the palming/carrying rule was adopted a few years ago, the call would have had to either be traveling or double dribble. Usually, it was DD, but occasionally traveling would be the proper call as it happened first.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Pece

Is this Spanish or did we tap the egg nog keg early?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Is this Spanish or did we tap the egg nog keg early?

No, Portuguese.

"Pecs"

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I think this is a very legitimate point. The problem is based on the descriptions that were shown of these kinds of plays show the hand being under or on the side of the ball (and moving it across the dribblers body). This did not look that way at all in my opinion.

Without a doubt the play you describe makes the violation, if called, more obvious. But to reiterate the point, the position of the hand on the ball is not mentioned anywhere in the dribble rule. Conceivably, especially with a tall player, a high dribble with the hand in the 12 o'clock position could easily result in longer contact than a small player making a quick crossover move with the hand in the 3 or 4 o'clock position.

Like some others, even though not written, advantage gained is often a factor in making this call.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Without a doubt the play you describe makes the violation, if called, more obvious. But to reiterate the point, the position of the hand on the ball is not mentioned anywhere in the dribble rule. Conceivably, especially with a tall player, a high dribble with the hand in the 12 o'clock position could easily result in longer contact than a small player making a quick crossover move with the hand in the 3 or 4 o'clock position.

Like some others, even though not written, advantage gained is often a factor in making this call.

I agree it is not written. But when it is not written, then you can use other literature used. And there have been examples shown by the NF in their Simplified and Illustrated Rulebook and used in PowerPoint slides. If they are not showing a carry/palming with the hand on top, then I think it is safe to say they are not considering this action to be illegal. The one picture that they use over and over again is the one with the hand under the ball. I just think it would be highly technical to call it a violation and the player clearly had their hand on top.

Peace

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I agree it is not written. But when it is not written, then you can use other literature used. And there have been examples shown by the NF in their Simplified and Illustrated Rulebook and used in PowerPoint slides. If they are not showing a carry/palming with the hand on top, then I think it is safe to say they are not considering this action to be illegal. The one picture that they use over and over again is the one with the hand under the ball. I just think it would be highly technical to call it a violation and the player clearly had their hand on top.

Peace

One situation in which I have made this call is when the players makes contact with the ball early and maintains this contact for an extended period while the ball travels upward, then continues this contact while making a significant directional change. All this can be done with the hand location
on/near the top of the ball.

[bas2456]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Carry/palming is, essentially, either a travel or a double dribble.

Does his hand get under the ball? Does he grasp it from above ("palming" it)? I didn't see either of those, so I'm not sure how you're seeing it. You're right, though, it's judgment.

The video quality isn't exactly HD, so maybe my eyes are deceiving me, but as I envision this play in a game, as I've said before, it seems to me that whatever he does would garner him a distinct advantage over the defender. To me, that advantage doesn't come from his athletic ability here.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by bas2456

The video quality isn't exactly HD, so maybe my eyes are deceiving me, but as I envision this play in a game, as I've said before, it seems to me that whatever he does would garner him a distinct advantage over the defender. To me, that advantage doesn't come from his athletic ability here.

You're right, the move provides an advantage, but that's not necessarily wrong. There are two questions to ask:
1. Is he breaking the rule? I don't think so.
2. Is he taking advantage of some loophole to gain an unintended advantage? To me, this answer is even easier than the first; No.

If you're going to call this because he takes too many steps between dribbles, I'll say it again, you're going to have to call a lot of point guards for traveling on fast breaks. They'll have their hand on the ball for the same amount of time as this guy, and they're running while they do it.

[bas2456]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

You're right, the move provides an advantage, but that's not necessarily wrong. There are two questions to ask:
1. Is he breaking the rule? I don't think so.
2. Is he taking advantage of some loophole to gain an unintended advantage? To me, this answer is even easier than the first; No.

If you're going to call this because he takes too many steps between dribbles, I'll say it again, you're going to have to call a lot of point guards for traveling on fast breaks. They'll have their hand on the ball for the same amount of time as this guy, and they're running while they do it.

I've rescinded the traveling argument. I would call a violation because to me, as I said, the ball comes to rest in his hand.