Illegal Dribble

[nebasketball]

Once again, I’m not an official so please excuse my rules ignorance.

Situation:
Player A1 ends his dribble and holds the ball. The ball is then displaced from his grasp by B1. Player A1 then retrieves the ball before it strikes the court. Player A1 then dribbles a second time.

Happened today in a pickup game, most thought it was an illegal dribble because the ball never touched the floor. Looking at NFHS, NCAA, and NBA rules they all state it is not an illegal dribble if control was lost due to a “touch” (NFHS 9-5-2), a “bat” (NCAA), or “touching” (NBA) by an opponent. So was this a violation or not?

Thanks for the response,
Steve

[just another ref]

Touching the floor is not the key. If control was lost, he can start another dribble.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by just another ref

If control was lost, he can start another dribble.

...and the loss of control was caused by the touch of an opponent.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

...and the loss of control was caused by the touch of an opponent.

That was a given. My point was that touching the floor was not necessary to say that control had been lost.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by just another ref

That was a given. My point was that touching the floor was not necessary to say that control had been lost.

I had no problem with your answer to the original post, I was just trying to generalize.

[Nevadaref]

No violation

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by nebasketball

Once again, I’m not an official so please excuse my rules ignorance.

Situation:
Player A1 ends his dribble and holds the ball. The ball is then displaced from his grasp by B1. Player A1 then retrieves the ball before it strikes the court. Player A1 then dribbles a second time.

Happened today in a pickup game, most thought it was an illegal dribble because the ball never touched the floor. Looking at NFHS, NCAA, and NBA rules they all state it is not an illegal dribble if control was lost due to a “touch” (NFHS 9-5-2), a “bat” (NCAA), or “touching” (NBA) by an opponent. So was this a violation or not?

Thanks for the response,
Steve

Steve, look at it this way. When B1 batted the ball out of A1's hands, player control ended. If A1 is able to recover the ball, he has established a "new" player control. It's no different than if he had rebounded it or received a pass. He can dribble again.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

Steve, look at it this way. When B1 batted the ball out of A1's hands, player control ended. If A1 is able to recover the ball, he has established a "new" player control. It's no different than if he had rebounded it or received a pass. He can dribble again.

I know that you know this, but I just want to clarify.

It's not always enough merely to establish "new" player control in order to dribble again. If the player were to dribble, catch the ball and then fumble it, that is a loss of player control; and that player can go retrieve it and establish a "new" player control. But that player can't dribble again in that situation.

What makes the original play legal is that the loss of player control was caused by a defensive player touching the ball. It's the defensive touch (either causing the loss of control, or occurring while control is lost) that allows the player to establish a "new" player control and start a new dribble.

[BktBallRef]

Hmph. I wrote, "When B1 batted the ball out of A1's hands,..." and "It's no different than if he had rebounded it or received a pass," to address when/why he could dribble again. Nowhere did I say or give anyone the idea that he could dribble again if he fumbled.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

Nowhere did I say or give anyone the idea that he could dribble again if he fumbled.

And I never said that you did. I was just expanding and clarifying the "new player control" comment. I was certainly not trying to correct your post; just adding my two cents to that one phrase.