help w/traveling interpretation
 

searching online to gain a better understanding of bball rules, i came across this bit of information:

4.44.3 SITUATION A: A1 jumps to try for goal. B1 also jumps and: (a) slaps the ball out of A1’s hands; (b) touches the ball but does not prevent A1 from releasing the ball; (c) touches the ball and A1 returns to the floor holding the ball; or (d) touches the ball and A1 drops it to the floor and touches it first after it bounces . RULING: In (a) and (b), the ball remains live. In (c), a traveling violation. In (d), a violation for starting a dribble with the pivot foot off the floor. Since the touching did not prevent the pass or try in (b), (c) and (d), the ball remains live and subsequent action is covered by rules which apply to the situation.

i understand the ruling in these situations but what confounds me is the final sentence. once a violation occurs, play is stopped, no? hence, there is no live ball until it is put back into play by the non-offending team. am i correct or did i misunderstand their interpretation?

Sounds like you have a good understanding.

The ball is live after the touching, but becomes dead when the travelling violation happens -- the time between those two events is relatively small.

In case (a) A1 cannot commit any violation, while in the other cases it's possible, depending on what happens. Probably they wanted to stress that the ball remains live after B1's touch until a violation occurs; for example, in case (c) the ball remains live until A1 returns to the floor.

Ciao

This Looks Like A Job For The Mythbusters ...
 

When an airborne player keeps control of an attempted shot that is blocked and is unable to release the ball and returns to the floor with it, that player has not traveled; it is a held ball. If, in this situation, the shooter loses control of the ball because of the block, then this is simply a blocked shot and play continues. If, in this situation, the defender simply touches the ball, and the airborne shooter returns to the floor holding the ball, it’s a traveling violation. When an airborne player tries for goal, sees that the try will be blocked, purposely drops the ball, and picks up the ball after it hits the floor, that player has traveled by starting a dribble with the pivot foot off the floor.

Agree that if you jump up in the air to pass or shoot and change your mind and put the ball down on the ground to start a dribble it's a violation! I was just wondering what this rule was preventing??? why do they want this to be a violation? I know it has been a rule forever, but me being bored was just trying to think of why they would not allow someone to either jump up to shoot, pass, or start a dribble! I mean that would be a good fake I guess, if I was to jump and fake the shot and then take off and dribble instead, maybe they don't think it's good for the game to allow such a fake like that, I don't know!! :)

The rule states a player can't lift his foot prior to releasing a dribble.

Why would you let him do that in one instance but not in another?

Which (only to add to your response) is merely a limit on how quickly A1 can start moving before dribbling. Permitting the piviot foot to be lifted before dribbling would give A1 a much greater advantage relative to the defense.

In the case of a jump (for a potential shot/pass), it could also turn into a big advantage for A1. The defender would have to choose to stay on the floor and not jump to defend the shot at risk of the A1 starting a dribble before landing and making a move to get around the defense before the defense lands.