rebound, pass

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by bainsey

For example, A1 is in the backcourt and attempts a try for goal. Player/team control has ended. A1 chases down the ball and catches it. Control is back. A1 repeats, and repeats, and repeats. You can't call travelling, because (team) control ends on each "shot."

Not relavent. This is important - team control ends on a shot. In the OP, team control is established with the catch of the rebound, and team control does not end with the pass. Therefore, your example doesn't apply.

Originally Posted by bainsey

It sounds to me like we need to define when player control ended in the OP. If it began when the player secured the ball, did it end when he released the ball on the pass? If so, the travelling rule only covers when there is one or two feet on the floor, not zero.

And the violation that occurs is an illegal dribble per the case play, not a travel. It is not a "pass", because as per the definition, it did not go to another player. Therefore, it can only be part of a dribble. Then 4-15-2 comes in: "During a dribble the ball may be batted into the air provided it is permitted to strike the floor before the ball is touched again with the hands." If the ball was still in the air when the player retrieved it, it is a violation. If the ball hit the floor, then it is part of a dribble. If they catch it, then dribble again, that would be another violation.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by SmokeEater

The rebounder is jumping up several times and using a controlled tip to him/herself to keep the ball away from a defender until they can gather it with both hands. As a result of the tips the player moves several feet from the initial rebounding location. Some would call this good rebounding skills some may not.

No matter what they call it, it's perfectly legal under NFHS and NCAA rules. There is no player control on a tip. They can 'control tip' the ball from one end of the court to the other legally as long as the ball never comes to rest on the hand of the player tipping it.

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by SmokeEater

I'll throw this in the mix as well.

The rebounder is jumping up several times and using a controlled tip to him/herself to keep the ball away from a defender until they can gather it with both hands. As a result of the tips the player moves several feet from the initial rebounding location. Some would call this good rebounding skills some may not.

Have they now done a similar act as what was in the OP?

No, because player control was never established in your case, but it was in the OP, because they specifically said the rebound was caught.

4-12-5 seems to cover your play: "Team control does not exist during a jump ball, or the touching of a rebound, but is re-established when a player secures control." 4-12-1 tells us player control only exists when a player is holding or dribbling a live ball inbounds.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

And the violation that occurs is an illegal dribble per the case play, not a travel. It is not a "pass", because as per the definition, it did not go to another player. Therefore, it can only be part of a dribble. Then 4-15-2 comes in: "During a dribble the ball may be batted into the air provided it is permitted to strike the floor before the ball is touched again with the hands." If the ball was still in the air when the player retrieved it, it is a violation. If the ball hit the floor, then it is part of a dribble. If they catch it, then dribble again, that would be another violation.

Bingo!

It doesn't meet the definition of a "fumble" either. That leaves a dribble as the only alternative.

[bainsey]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

Not relavent.[sic]

To the OP, M&M? True. That illustration had more to do with Cam's example than anything.

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

You need to learn basic definitions, Bainsey.

Already covered, chief. If you notice in the following paragraph, "pass" is in quotes. Perhaps I should have done the same there, too, for clarity's sake.

Anyway, the number of feet on the floor is irrelevant when touching the ball twice. That's fine. While that certainly isn't a pass, and the act is indeed a violation, I'm not yet sold it's a dribble, either. If a dribble starts with the act of pushing the ball to the floor (NFHS 4-15-1), how can one call an illegal dribble when the definition of dribbling is not met?

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by bainsey

If a dribble starts with the act of pushing the ball to the floor (NFHS 4-15-1), how can one call an illegal dribble when the definition of dribbling is not met?

It would be an illegal dribble for that very reason....it didn't fit the required definition of dribbing. The legal method of dribbling is defined...any other method of of moving with "control" of the ball is illegal....an illegal dribble or a travel.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by bainsey

While that certainly isn't a pass, and the act is indeed a violation, I'm not yet sold it's a dribble, either. If a dribble starts with the act of pushing the ball to the floor (NFHS 4-15-1), how can one call an illegal dribble when the definition of dribbling is not met?

Doesn't NFHS rule 4-15-2 say that you can legally bat the ball into the air during a dribble provided that the ball hits the floor before you touch it again? Doesn't a dribble start as soon as the ball leaves the dribbler's hand(s)?

That's where the definition of a "dribble" is met in the play being discussed.

[bainsey]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Doesn't a dribble start as soon as the ball leaves the dribbler's hand(s)?

Absolutely, IF he is dribbling.

Consider the pass definition from earlier. If the action doesn't meet the definition of the pass, it's not a pass. That's the exact point I'm making about dribbling. If the action doesn't meet the definition of dribbling, then to be consistent, it shouldn't be called "dribbling," be it legal or illegal. While Case 4.15.4D(a) shows an illegal action after dribbling had started, the OP features a play where the definition isn't met.

Ultimately, it's a violation, and most people won't care what you call it, as long as you call it something. Perhaps "illegal dribble" is the closest we have within the existing rules, and considering the infinitesimal chance we'll ever have this play, that probably won't change.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

And the violation that occurs is an illegal dribble per the case play, not a travel.

Not according to the "new" case book ruling. Please recall that the violation was changed a couple of years ago from illegal dribble to traveling by that rules guru Mary S.

For the record, I agree with Camron and JR that this action should be illegal. However, I can't find anything in the text of the NFHS rules that makes it so.

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by bainsey

Absolutely, IF he is dribbling.

You may be confusing the definitions of the terms dribble and pass with the generally accepted meanings, and intent of the player. A pass, by rule, is to another player. The fact that you even used quotes to call it a "pass" when the same player retrieved it shows you have the rule confused with intent. If A1 releases the ball, even with the obvious intent that it's towards a teammate, and still ends up going to get the ball because the teammate doesn't see it coming, it is simply not a pass, according to the rules. There is even a recent case play or interp that states that very concept, and even states it is considered a dribble after A1 retrieves it.

The same with a dribble - don't confuse the "generally accepted action" of bouncing the ball straight up and down from the hand about waist high down to the floor, with the definition of a dribble. The ball doesn't have to go in a direct line from the hand to the floor, but can even go up in the air, as long as it's allowed to hit the ground before being touched again (4-15-2). There are several case plays that support the idea that a dribble is not limited to only bouncing the ball straight up and down.

That's what JR and I are saying - in the OP, it wasn't a pass, by rule, because the ball didn't go to another player. It wasn't a fumble, because there wasn't accidental loss of control (as per another definition, 4-21). It wasn't a try. So that makes the player's action a dribble, by rule. And thus, you can make a determination of whether an action is legal or not based on dribble and travelling rules.

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Not according to the "new" case book ruling. Please recall that the violation was changed a couple of years ago from illegal dribble to traveling by that rules guru Mary S.

Oh, yea...I vaguely remember that... I may need to get a more recent copy here at the office. I wonder if my boss would mind if I took some additional bookshelf space for more basketball-related items?...

At least we agree it's a violation, even though we may disagree which one.

[bainsey]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

You may be confusing the definitions of the terms dribble and pass with the generally accepted meanings, and intent of the player. A pass, by rule, is to another player. The fact that you even used quotes to call it a "pass" when the same player retrieved it shows you have the rule confused with intent.

I may have confused some of you with my "pass" notation. The quotes basically said "for the the lack of a better word," but I know it's wrong.

The ball doesn't have to go in a direct line from the hand to the floor, but can even go up in the air, as long as it's allowed to hit the ground before being touched again (4-15-2)

Actually, that's my point, and it's all about the definition, not the general acceptance. My understanding of the OP was that ball was never allowed to hit the floor, so it wouldn't meet the definition of a dribble, either. If it hits the floor, that's a different story.

in the OP, it wasn't a pass.... It wasn't a fumble.... It wasn't a try.... So that makes the player's action a dribble, by rule.

So, if it's not A, nor B, nor C, then it must be D, even though the action doesn't meet the definition of D? Is there a rule the cites this?

I wonder if my boss would mind if I took some additional bookshelf space for more basketball-related items?

I've wondered that myself. For now, I keep mine in a desk drawer.

Aside to Nevada: Do you have that recent case in question? That may put this whole argument to bed.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by bainsey

Actually, that's my point, and it's all about the definition, not the general acceptance. In the OP, the ball was never allowed to hit the ground, so it doesn't meet the definition of a dribble, either.

That's the problem. The ball was released. It was not a pass, a fumble, or a try, so it is a dribble. It was touched a second time before it touched the floor, so it is a violation.

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by bainsey

Actually, that's my point, and it's all about the definition, not the general acceptance. In the OP, the ball was never allowed to hit the ground, so it doesn't meet the definition of a dribble, either.

Actually, it meets the definition of an illegal dribble. See jar's response above.

Originally Posted by bainsey

So, if it's not A, nor B, nor C, then it must be D, even though the action doesn't meet the definition of D? Is there a rule the cites this?

Yep - 4-15. If it's not 4-15, then what rule would you use to govern the ball movement/play as described?

Originally Posted by bainsey

Aside to Nevada: Do you have that recent case in question? That may put this whole argument to bed.

I believe the case play he mentions - 4.15.4 Sit E (b) - changed the original interp from a dribble violation to a traveling violation. Not many of us can figure why it's traveling, but at least we agree it's still a violation nontheless.

[bainsey]

Originally Posted by just another ref

That's the problem. The ball was released. It was not a pass, a fumble, or a try, so it is a dribble. It was touched a second time before it touched the floor, so it is a violation.

We agree it's a violation (and perhaps that's good enough for 99% of us), but I maintain it can't be an illegal dribble, because the definition of dribble wasn't met in the first place. You can't have an illegal anything unless the definition of the "anything" is satisfied. (For example, there's no illegal contact without contact.)

Yes, touching the ball twice is indeed illegal while dribbling. Looking at that, let's say A-1 stands flat footed, tosses the ball up with his left hand, and while remaining flat-footed, catches the ball with his right. Is this a violation? Is this an illegal dribble? The ball was touched twice before hitting floor, but I say no violation, and certainly not an illegal dribble. The touched-twice rule only works when the dribble has begun.

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

If it's not 4-15, then what rule would you use to govern the ball movement/play as described?

I don't have a 2009-10 rule/case book handy, but perhaps 4.15.4 Sit E (b) calls it a travel, because the player moved from one spot on the floor to another, touching it in two different spots, and never truly started the dribble. Using the same logic, if it's not a dribble, nor a pass, nor a try, etc., then it can only be a travel.