Double Dribble

[CDurham]

A2 has ended the dribble. She then fumbles the ball and it drops and hits her foot. It rolls and she then picks it up and dribbles. It was not touched by an opponent she just lost the ball and fumbled it from having butter fingers.

Would this constitute a Double Dribble on the basis of 9-5-3 not happening?

But, now where does loss of player control come into play? If she loses the ball and it rolls, it is not in her possession, and say the official deems it not in her possessoin. Can she not dribble again?

[Back In The Saddle]

An axiom frequently stated here is "You may fumble, dribble, fumble; but you may not dribble, fumble, dribble."

Once a player has ended her dribble, she may not dribble a second time without one of the actions in 9-5 occurring. In your scenario A2 has not tried for field goal, she did not lose control because of a touch by an opponent, and her fumble was not touched by another player. Ergo, tweet!

[Mark Padgett]

Originally Posted by Back In The Saddle

Ergo, tweet!

BITS nailed it. A big tweet on this one.

[Nevadaref]

A2 can retrieve her fumble, but she is not permitted to dribble a second time. That is a violation.

[Jurassic Referee]

Case book play 4.15.4SitD(c)

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by CDurham

A2 has ended the dribble. She then fumbles the ball and it drops and hits her foot. It rolls and she then picks it up and dribbles. It was not touched by an opponent she just lost the ball and fumbled it from having butter fingers.

Would this constitute a Double Dribble on the basis of 9-5-3 not happening?

But, now where does loss of player control come into play? If she loses the ball and it rolls, it is not in her possession, and say the official deems it not in her possessoin. Can she not dribble again?

You cites the rulle. "Not in possession" is NOT sufficient to allow a second dribble. Only under certain reasons for "not in possession" is it allowed -- and your play isn't one of those reasons.