Why call traveling? It's the NBE.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Are you sure?

DRIBBLE – LEGAL AND ILLEGAL MOVEMENT
4.15 COMMENT: It is not possible for a player to travel during a dribble. A player
is not dribbling while slapping the ball during a jump, when a pass rebounds
from his/her hand, when he/she fumbles, or when he/she bats a rebound or pass
away from other players who are attempting to get it. The player is not in control
under these conditions. It is a dribble when a player stands still and bounces the
ball. It is not a dribble when a player stands still and holds the ball and touches
it to the floor once or more than once.


Granted he wasn't standing, but was Rondo holding the ball while touching it to the floor?

We know that doesn't constitute a dribble, so if the official deems him to be holding the ball, then getting up would be illegal.

Rondo did not "touch the ball to the floor." It was already touching the floor.
In my view, he was not holding the ball.

[Adam]

Wow, when I saw the replay last night, my first comment was that he traveled. It was obvious. Then I thought I remembered that the NBA rule was different on this particular play.

I still say, by NFHS rules, it was a travel. He held it, put it on the floor, stood up, tweet.

The ones arguing against a travel seem to suggest that if he'd taken his hand off the ball when he put it on the floor, it would have been a travel. IOW, if he'd relinquished a bit of physical control, it would have been illegal. The flip side is, by maintaining a hold on the ball and pinning it against the floor, he has found a loophole. I highly doubt that's the intent of the rule.

Question for those who think pinning the ball to the floor is not holding it: A1 dives for a loose ball, pinning it to the floor with one arm. B2 comes in and simultaneously pins it to the floor with one arm. Do you have a held ball here?

Nevada also clearly points out the rule that says pinning it to the floor is not a dribble and thus a player would be called for traveling if he pins it and proceeds to move his pivot foot outside of the prescribed limits.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Question for those who think pinning the ball to the floor is not holding it: A1 dives for a loose ball, pinning it to the floor with one arm. B2 comes in and simultaneously pins it to the floor with one arm. Do you have a held ball here?

It is not necessary for a player to be holding the ball in order to have a held ball.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by just another ref

It is not necessary for a player to be holding the ball in order to have a held ball.

Good point, just re-read the def of held ball.
The rest of my post still stands. Are you suggesting that the rules committee wants the player to be able to stand while pinning it to the floor but not while releasing it ?

This seems to be to be the epitome of "advantage not intended by the rules."

Pinning it either has to be holding it or setting it on the floor. Either way, by rule, it's illegal (in this context).

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Pinning it either has to be holding it or setting it on the floor.

Disagree. The key is control. If we say he never held the ball, (this is certainly debatable) everything is all right. If he dove on the floor, touched the ball, and it rolled away, he would certainly be able to get up and do whatever.
I don't see this play as being any different.

[BillyMac]

YouTube - Rajon Rondo Hustle Dive For Ball vs Orlando Magic - 2010 Playoffs

I also saw the multiple replays on ESPN. Since I only use NFHS rules in all of my games, I immediately thought legal, or illegal, and how would I have called that in my high school game, in real time?

First replay: Illegal, based on the classic 4.44.5 SITUATION B interpretation.

Second replay: Wait minute? He's not holding the ball. The ball is pinned against the floor. Also Rondo did not "put the ball on the floor, rise, and (be the) first to touch the ball". The ball was already on the floor, and he was not the first to touch after standing, he was touching it the whole, entire time. Maybe this is a legal play? "When in doubt, don't be" has been drilled into my head by both Forum members, and by the powers that be in my local board. Since I'm not really 100% sure here, after further review of the replays, I'm voting NFHS legal.

Now, from a strictly rulebook interpretation, I welcome Forum members to please try to convince me otherwise.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Now, from a strictly rulebook interpretation, I welcome Forum members to please try to convince me otherwise.

There's only one possible way to definitively come up with the right answer. Have a poll.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Disagree. The key is control. If we say he never held the ball, (this is certainly debatable) everything is all right. If he dove on the floor, touched the ball, and it rolled away, he would certainly be able to get up and do whatever.
I don't see this play as being any different.

But the ball didn't roll away. He had complete and total control to the point where I would have granted a timeout while it was pinned.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

But the ball didn't roll away. He had complete and total control to the point where I would have granted a timeout while it was pinned.

I agree, but with that being said it is not clearly listed this is control to where a travel is concerned. Then again that is why I said earlier that I m not convinced this is technically illegal. It sounds like a play that was never considered by the NF (or NCAA that I am aware of) for legality.

Peace

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

He had complete and total control to the point where I would have granted a timeout while it was pinned.

Then you are deeming that he is HOLDING the ball because only by establishing player control can a time-out request be granted during a live ball (other than at the disposal situations), and player control is defined as holding or dribbling a live ball inbounds.

Anyone who would have granted a request for a time-out to a player pinning the ball to the floor in this manner is admitting that this action constitutes holding the ball.

The reason that I posted 4.15 Comment earlier in this thread was to demonstrate that the NFHS considers it possible for a player to be holding the ball while it is touching the floor.

[grunewar]

Got a call tonight from my nephew......"Hey, Uncle Rob, did you see the play in the Celtic's vs the Magic Game where Rondo dove for the ball and got up? That's a walk right? They missed it didn't they?"

"Ya see, the Pros, College and HS have different rules......." and so it goes......