The Official Forum

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)
-   Basketball (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/)
-   -   Legal? Sitting on butt an then lay down (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/56226-legal-sitting-butt-then-lay-down.html)

cford Sun Jan 03, 2010 11:50am
Legal? Sitting on butt an then lay down
 
Can a player while sitting on the floor holding the ball, lay down on his/her back? (Basically the opposite of the legal play where the player laying down sits up...4.44.5b)

I can't think of any reason that would make this illegal.

bob jenkins Sun Jan 03, 2010 12:38pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by cford (Post 648057)
Can a player while sitting on the floor holding the ball, lay down on his/her back? (Basically the opposite of the legal play where the player laying down sits up...4.44.5b)

I can't think of any reason that would make this illegal.
Then it's legal.

mick Sun Jan 03, 2010 02:29pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by cford (Post 648057)
Can a player while sitting on the floor holding the ball, lay down on his/her back? (Basically the opposite of the legal play where the player laying down sits up...4.44.5b)

I can't think of any reason that would make this illegal.
Section 44 TRAVELING
ART. 5 . . .
A player holding the ball:
a. May not touch the floor with a knee or any other part of the body other than
hand or foot.

I think Rule 44-5-a shows that a player (though sitting) holding the ball and then touching the player's back (not hand or foot) to the floor is a violation.

Adam Sun Jan 03, 2010 03:08pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by mick (Post 648083)
Section 44 TRAVELING
ART. 5 . . .
A player holding the ball:
a. May not touch the floor with a knee or any other part of the body other than
hand or foot.

I think Rule 44-5-a shows that a player (though sitting) holding the ball and then touching the player's back (not hand or foot) to the floor is a violation.
So if a player sitting on the floor who legally gains possession of the ball then touches the floor with his elbow, you're going to call the violation?

just another ref Sun Jan 03, 2010 03:17pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snaqwells (Post 648090)
So if a player sitting on the floor who legally gains possession of the ball then touches the floor with his elbow, you're going to call the violation?
This is what I was thinking. Though it is not specified, I always took it for granted that this rule refers to a standing player.

Mark Padgett Sun Jan 03, 2010 03:17pm
It's not a travel unless he moves his pivot cheek. :rolleyes:

Actually, the points made in the thread are really interesting. By strict interpretation of that rule, it would be a travel if the player touched the floor with his back or his elbow, or even his wrist, if you don't consider the wrist a part of the hand. I must admit in all my years, I've never called a travel if the player sitting up while on the floor with the ball laid back down, and certainly not if his elbow hit the floor. Maybe I was wrong.

mick Sun Jan 03, 2010 03:17pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by mick (Post 648083)
Section 44 TRAVELING


ART. 5 . . .
A player holding the ball:
a. May not touch the floor with a knee or any other part of the body other than
hand or foot.


I think Rule 44-5-a shows that a player (though sitting) holding the ball and then touching the player's back (not hand or foot) to the floor is a violation.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Snaqwells (Post 648090)
So if a player sitting on the floor who legally gains possession of the ball then touches the floor with his elbow, you're going to call the violation?

Shirley, I think the rule is not difficut.
"Other than hand or foot" is not a difficult concept, methinks.

BillyMac Sun Jan 03, 2010 04:00pm
Time For A Nap ???
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Padgett (Post 648093)
I must admit in all my years, I've never called a travel if the player sitting up while on the floor with the ball laid back down.
And you've seen this play, how many times?

BillyMac Sun Jan 03, 2010 04:06pm
Quote Was Better On Airplane ...
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mick (Post 648094)
Shirley, I think the rule is not difficut.
YouTube - michael scott don't call me shirley

Adam Sun Jan 03, 2010 04:11pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by mick (Post 648094)
Shirley, I think the rule is not difficut.
"Other than hand or foot" is not a difficult concept, methinks.
[/LEFT]
No, it's not, but whether it applies to a player who gains the ball while on the floor is up for discussion, don't you think?

just another ref Sun Jan 03, 2010 04:24pm
If interpreted literally, this rule could say that it is traveling when the player on the floor gains control.

...............player holding the ball may not touch the floor with......any other body part...............


It doesn't say may not subsequently touch.........

Therefore, we must conclude that4-44-5a refers to a standing player.
Correct?

Mark Padgett Sun Jan 03, 2010 05:03pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by just another ref (Post 648103)
If interpreted literally, this rule could say that it is traveling when the player on the floor gains control.

...............player holding the ball may not touch the floor with......any other body part...............


It doesn't say may not subsequently touch.........

Therefore, we must conclude that4-44-5a refers to a standing player.
Correct?
Wow -what a great interpretation. JAR, gotta' give you props for this. I think you may have nailed it. Deducing this puts you in the same category as that British detective with the deer stalker hat. I'm not kidding - this was absolutely brilliant.

BillyMac Sun Jan 03, 2010 05:34pm
"I can't make bricks without clay."
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Padgett (Post 648110)
Deducing this puts you in the same category as that British detective with the deer stalker hat.
"Excellent!" I cried. "Elementary," said he.

mick Sun Jan 03, 2010 05:42pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snaqwells (Post 648102)
No, it's not, but whether it applies to a player who gains the ball while on the floor is up for discussion, don't you think?
Descriptions and exceptions are shown for being on the floor [i.e., rolling, sliding, laying on the back, sitting up], but no exceptions are given for holding the ball.

Holding the ball is holding the ball, whether sitting or standing.
While holding the ball, if [standing or sitting] A slaps away a defender's hand, what, if any, kind of foul would be called on A?
While holding the ball, may [standing or sitting] A shoot, or pass, or start a dribble?

Then why while holding the ball may [standing or sitting] Player A be allowed to touch A's back (or elbow) to the floor, without a specifically noted exception to the rule [as written]?
If A is allowed to lay down, it is quite possible, though obviously not a basketball play, for A to lay down with enough force to locomote to another place on the court by laying back, legally sitting up, and laying back again.

I think the rule is clear. :)

mick Sun Jan 03, 2010 05:46pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by just another ref (Post 648103)
If interpreted literally, this rule could say that it is traveling when the player on the floor gains control.

...............player holding the ball may not touch the floor with......any other body part...............


It doesn't say may not subsequently touch.........

Therefore, we must conclude that4-44-5a refers to a standing player.
Correct?
I was using the words that were printed and not the words which were omitted, imagined or possible heard from the *voices*. ;)

Camron Rust Sun Jan 03, 2010 06:13pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by mick (Post 648116)
I was using the words that were printed and not the words which were omitted, imagined or possible heard from the *voices*. ;)
Except that in this case, there are implied words. That should be obvious. I don't think any one has ever observed or made a traveling call on a player who is seated or lying on the floor then picks up the ball. If we were to take the rule literally, that would be the necessary result.

Adam Sun Jan 03, 2010 06:48pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by mick (Post 648115)
Descriptions and exceptions are shown for being on the floor [i.e., rolling, sliding, laying on the back, sitting up], but no exceptions are given for holding the ball.

Holding the ball is holding the ball, whether sitting or standing.
While holding the ball, if [standing or sitting] A slaps away a defender's hand, what, if any, kind of foul would be called on A?
While holding the ball, may [standing or sitting] A shoot, or pass, or start a dribble?

Then why while holding the ball may [standing or sitting] Player A be allowed to touch A's back (or elbow) to the floor, without a specifically noted exception to the rule [as written]?
If A is allowed to lay down, it is quite possible, though obviously not a basketball play, for A to lay down with enough force to locomote to another place on the court by laying back, legally sitting up, and laying back again.

I think the rule is clear. :)
Mick, I read this rule the was jar does. Yes, the rule is clear, but I've always understood your posted portion to be inapplicable to a player who legally gains control of the ball while otherwise in violation of this rule.

Restrictions on what may be done after gaining control on the floor are different. Otherwise, how do you not call a violation on the player for having his rear end touch the floor while he's holding it.

If you're going to say anything touching when he gained control is excepted, fine. Will you then call a violation on the player who gains control lying on his back and proceeds to touch his elbow to the floor?

If the rules you state apply to a player already on the floor, then my understanding of this rule is completely flawed.

"Coach, you're right, he was on the floor when he got it. But then he touched the floor with his calf when he straighted his legs out."

mick Sun Jan 03, 2010 07:25pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snaqwells (Post 648133)
Mick, I read this rule the was jar does. Yes, the rule is clear, but I've always understood your posted portion to be inapplicable to a player who legally gains control of the ball while otherwise in violation of this rule.

Restrictions on what may be done after gaining control on the floor are different. Otherwise, how do you not call a violation on the player for having his rear end touch the floor while he's holding it.

If you're going to say anything touching when he gained control is excepted, fine. Will you then call a violation on the player who gains control lying on his back and proceeds to touch his elbow to the floor?

If the rules you state apply to a player already on the floor, then my understanding of this rule is completely flawed.

"Coach, you're right, he was on the floor when he got it. But then he touched the floor with his calf when he straighted his legs out."
  • The rule is clear but you undertood it to mean *more* based on what?
  • Restrictions are spelled out. The allowance to sit and hold is shown. And as you showed most of the traveling rule is based upon what a player is allowed to do, while most of the other rules show what a player may not do.
  • If the player touches his elbow for any reason other than sitting upright (which is permitted), then yes, I believe a violation has occurred.
  • With no exception written for a player holding while sitting on the floor, I do not think an exception should be contrived.
  • Again, if the player touches his body parts to the floor in an effort to sit up, I have no violation, but no movement by the player in the sitting position is permitted except passing, shooting and starting a dribble to rise. Neither laying down, nor leaning on an elbow is permitted.

Adam Sun Jan 03, 2010 08:15pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by mick (Post 648153)
  • The rule is clear but you undertood it to mean *more* based on what?
  • Restrictions are spelled out. The allowance to sit and hold is shown. And as you showed most of the traveling rule is based upon what a player is allowed to do, while most of the other rules show what a player may not do.
  • If the player touches his elbow for any reason other than sitting upright (which is permitted), then yes, I believe a violation has occurred.
  • With no exception written for a player holding while sitting on the floor, I do not think an exception should be contrived.
  • Again, if the player touches his body parts to the floor in an effort to sit up, I have no violation, but no movement by the player in the sitting position is permitted except passing, shooting and starting a dribble to rise. Neither laying down, nor leaning on an elbow is permitted.
I understand your interpretation, thanks Mick. I don't understand the portion highlighted in red, though.
It says a player may sit up, it doesn't specify that he may break other rules to do so.

mick Sun Jan 03, 2010 08:39pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by mick (Post 648153)
  • The rule is clear but you undertood it to mean *more* based on what?
  • Restrictions are spelled out. The allowance to sit and hold is shown. And as you showed most of the traveling rule is based upon what a player is allowed to do, while most of the other rules show what a player may not do.
  • If the player touches his elbow for any reason other than sitting upright (which is permitted), then yes, I believe a violation has occurred.
  • With no exception written for a player holding while sitting on the floor, I do not think an exception should be contrived.
  • Again, if the player touches his body parts to the floor in an effort to sit up, I have no violation, but no movement by the player in the sitting position is permitted except passing, shooting and starting a dribble to rise. Neither laying down, nor leaning on an elbow is permitted.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snaqwells (Post 648162)
I understand your interpretation, thanks Mick. I don't understand the portion highlighted in red, though.
It says a player may sit up, it doesn't specify that he may break other rules to do so.
I attempted to show that if an official interprets a movement (and subsequent touching of the floor by various body parts) by the player as simply the [allowed] attempt to sit up, then no violation has occurred.

Nevadaref Sun Jan 03, 2010 08:43pm
I agree with Snaqs.

Not that anyone cares about my opinion.

fullor30 Sun Jan 03, 2010 08:46pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nevadaref (Post 648174)
I agree with Snaqs.

Not that anyone cares about my opinion.
Agreed;)

Nevadaref Sun Jan 03, 2010 08:47pm
Shut up. :)

fullor30 Sun Jan 03, 2010 08:57pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nevadaref (Post 648176)
Shut up. :)
One more thing before I zip it, I actually agree with your agreement of Snaqs interp!

Back In The Saddle Mon Jan 04, 2010 02:31pm
While I agree that the raw text of the rule backs Mick's interpretation, I am with JAR and others on this. I believe the implied context of the rule limits its application to a player who gains possession of the ball while he/she is standing. We get into some pretty weird territory by attempting to apply it to a player who legally gains possession of the ball while seated/laying/sliding on the floor.

Just my $0.02


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:29pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1