You make da call

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by Anchor

Answer, if his hand was on top of the ball and he had it forcefully pinned (which is the way I have pretty much pictured this whole scenario) I would most likely grant the TO.

Which criterion of 'player control' has this player satisfied?

[FrankHtown]

Ok...player has hands big enought to palm the basketball. Now, is the player holding it, even though it's on the floor?

[slow whistle]

Originally Posted by FrankHtown

Ok...player has hands big enought to palm the basketball. Now, is the player holding it, even though it's on the floor?

Are his fingers closed around it? Have to judge whether or not he is controlling it, I am probably saying he is not unless he is obviously palming it and moving it around....a htbt for sure...

[Anchor]

Originally Posted by mbyron

Which criterion of 'player control' has this player satisfied?

If the defender did a belly slide and grabbed the ball on each side while the guy had his hand on top would it be a held ball?

[FrankHtown]

Great point, Anchor.

If the player on the floor could contest the defender taking the ball, then yes...he was "holding " the ball.

[tjones1]

Well, yes, but...

4-25
HELD BALL
A held ball occurs when:

4-25-1
Opponents have their hands so firmly on the ball that control cannot be obtained without undue roughness.

It doesn't say they are "holding"...

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by Anchor

If the defender did a belly slide and grabbed the ball on each side while the guy had his hand on top would it be a held ball?

I asked about player control. You're talking about a held ball. Different animals.

[FrankHtown]

How can you have your hands firmly on the ball without holding it?

Let's get the NF to define what "holding ....a live ball inbounds" means. Until then my interpretation may be different from others.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by FrankHtown

How can you have your hands firmly on the ball without holding it?

Let's get the NF to define what "holding ....a live ball inbounds" means. Until then my interpretation may be different from others.

Player goes up to shoot. Big guy there waiting for him. Puts one hand firmly on the ball and stuffs player, ball, and all back to the floor. Result: Held ball.
Did the defender actually hold the ball? NO

[Adam]

I know the rule sets are different, but the premise is the same, IMO. In football, a catch requires the ball not touch the ground; IOW the player does not catch it if he has trapped it with the ground. I would apply the same principal here, but only because the NFHS has not defined a player holding the ball.

If it's not clear, it's not a violation.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Player goes up to shoot. Big guy there waiting for him. Puts one hand firmly on the ball and stuffs player, ball, and all back to the floor. Result: Held ball.
Did the defender actually hold the ball? NO

Agree, but a different criterion is used in this particular case. And that criterion is that the defender prevented the shooter from releasing the ball. There is nothing in the rule governing this situation that states the defender also has to be holding the ball to prevent the shot.

Case book play 4.25.2

Note the usage of the word "criterion". I learned that one from our resident cunning linguist, MByron. I are now wise beyond my years.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

There is nothing in the rule governing this situation that states the defender also has to be holding the ball to prevent the shot.

That was my whole point. I was answering a question.

Originally Posted by FrankHtown

How can you have your hands firmly on the ball without holding it?

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Note the usage of the word "criterion". I learned that one from our resident cunning linguist, mbyron.

He's better than using a "Word of the Day" Calendar.