Travel, carry, or nothing?
 

HS GV last night my partner has a play that was kind of strange. A1 is driving towards the basket in front court guarded by B1. The ball gets pinned between B1's hip and A1's hand. It is there for a few counts as both players take 2-3 steps.

My partner whistles a travel.
We discussed it during halftime and I, without seeing the play, thought A1's control of the ball had ended so it would be a no call.

Travel, carry, or nothing?

Sounds like your partner had it. A1 had control and took several steps.

No Travel
 

I don't believe you have a travel here. If both players had control of the ball how can you call travel and who would you call it on? If neither had control you can't have a travel without control in this case. If both had control but neither could gain sole posession of the ball, the only thing I can come up with is a possible held ball.

How can B1 have control? 4-12-1...A player is in control of the ball when he/she is holding or dribbling a live ball inbounds.

Two teammates can have joint control and one can commit a travel violation. If two opponents have control and one travels, I'll go with a held ball virtually every time. I'm trying to figure out if this looks like control to me; I don't think so.

The definition of a held ball (4-25) notes hands from each player. Not the case here. I think this is a classic case of "ugly isn't necessarily illegal." Unless A1's hand was under the ball, I've got nothing.

The way I see it, the dribble hadn't ended yet, and a player cannot travel while dribbling. I don't think it's resting in A1's hand if it's B1's hip that's preventing it from going to the floor.

So I quess it's alright for A1 to stick the ball on the hip of A2 and run down the court?

That's my thinking as well
 

You have to have control to travel and both players have to have control to call a held ball. I'd have to see it but like you say "ugly isn't necessarily illegal.".

Could we look at this as an interrupted dribble? I know it's not the text book example, but his dribble was interrupted. I can't say that he really has control. Maybe he does but I'd have to see it. If the hand was under the ball, then we could go with a carry.

I'm not saying he did
 

This is a had to be there type of play. I was just thinking out loud at all the possibilities.

Look at it this way. A-1 goes up for a shot, which is blocked by B-2, who pins the ball to A-1's shooting hand. By rule, this is a held ball.

Simply put, the ball is pinned between two opposing players. If the resulting movement would be a travel(as a blocked shot of an airborne player), then I say you'd have to go with a held ball.

Nah, as even if this slips through some loophole in the rules; I think it's safe to say it's an advantage not intended by the rules. If A1's purposefully sticking the ball on the hip of a teammate, I'd consider that control.

No offensive player in his right mind would do this with an opponent's hip on purpose; dribbling is both easier and more controlled.

Besides, it would just be easier to dribble and use A2 as a blocker. :D

I don't think the held ball rule works here. You're referencing 4-25-2; applicable only on a shot. 4-25-1 requires the inability of either player to get singular control without undue roughness. Neither apply to the OP. No way I'm calling a held ball with one player's hand and one player's hip.

Look at it this way...held ball is both opponents with hands, not hips:eek:

SECTION 25 HELD BALL
A held ball occurs when:
ART. 1 . . . Opponents have their hands so firmly on the ball that control cannot be obtained without undue roughness.
ART. 2 . . . An opponent places his/her hand(s) on the ball and prevents an airborne player from throwing the ball or releasing it on a try.

No
 

That would be a travel as it violates the spirit of the rule. In order for you to travel you must first have control. If I pass you the ball and you are running up the court but bobble the ball while taking a few steps that is not a travel. However, if you intentionally bobble the ball while running up the court, I will call a travel. In the latter case if I deem you could have gained control but didn't so you could run up the court, I'm going to call a travel.

That's all good and I agree, however, in the OP the player never fumbled the ball, the ball never drops or slips from a player's grasp. That's why I say travel.

When did the dribble end?

When the ball came to rest in A1's hand.

Besides, in that case I'd consider the hip to be part of the leg. :D Not that really takes away from your point, though, as he could use the teammate's back instead.

But did it? I'm assuming that A1 is attempting to push the ball down in a dribble. It's not resting in his hand, it's resting on B1's hip. There's a difference.

It's nothing. A1 is still dribbling the ball.

Let's examine them.

a - A1's hand is resting on the ball rather than the ball resting in A1's hand.
b - A1 is not palming or carrying the ball.
c - A1 is only touching the ball with one hand.
d - A1 has not lost control (yet)
e - The ball has not become dead.

Since the dribble has not ended, A1 cannot be guilty of traveling.

Junk in the trunk.
 

Yes A1's hand is on top of the ball attempting to keep dribbling towards the goal. B1's hip ,whom was running beside, got between the ball and the floor during the dribble.

What if A1 was attempting to push the ball down and his own d#mn hip got in the way?

Yeah, in that case, I've got an on-going dribble and thus no travel.

That one would be a travel if they continued to take steps or an illegal dribble if they attempted to dribble again.

A1 would have control in this case which would end the dribble.

I would agree with "nothing," if the opposing players were standing still.

However, once A-1's pivot foot comes up and goes back down, you must have something. If you held the ball against a teammate's hip, and moved that pivot foot, you'd have a travel.

But, how can you have a travel when the ball is being touched by an opponent? With that, the only viable remaining option I see is a held ball.

You don't have a pivot foot; A1 is not holding the ball 4-33.

You don't have to have anything; the dribble continues.

And what if the hip is considered part of the leg and B-1 intentionally moved in the direction of the ball? Do you have a kicking violation? Clumsy is not a foul. And snaqs' corollary 'ugly is not a violation' seems to be the way to go on this play.

I'd call at travel on this, just as if he held it between his hand and stomach, or leg. But his hip does not equal B1's hip.

I agree. If it's his hip then he's caused the ball to be at rest in his hand, ending his dribble.

When the ball's motion has clearly been stopped?

Check the rule I quoted above. The ball's motion stopping isn't one of the 5 ways a dribble ends.

Use NFHS rules 4-12-1, 4-15-4(a) and 9-5-2 and break it down.

Did the ball come to rest? According to the OP, yes. By rule(4-15-4a) that ended the dribble. Did the dribbler have player control at that point? Always a judgment call. If you feel that the player maintained player control(i.e. was holding the ball), then you either have a travel while the ball wasn't being dribbled or an illegal second dribble when the player dribbles again after the ball was pinned. If you feel that the dribbler didn't have player control when the ball was pinned, then you can't have a travel without that player control and it's also legal for the dribbler to dribble a second time as per 9-5-2.

Judgment call. Your choice.

In real life, I'm personally going with the no-call. I don't think that the period when the ball was pinned between the opponents comprised player control by the dribbler. Usually when a player has control, they can do something with the ball(pass, shoot, dribble). That's not the case in the situation described.

JMO.

This reminds me of a play that I was involved with several years ago. I am the defender on the post player A1. A2 bounce passes (bad pass) the ball to A1, I reach around (legally mind you, I never foul), I pin the ball against A1's leg, then we both take several steps. A1 never has his hands on the ball. It was a pick up game so I am not sure what we ended up doing.

I disagree here. In this case, the defender, rather than the dribbler causes the ball to come to rest so the condition of 4-15-4a has not been met.

Didn't the ball come to rest while the dribbler was touching it continually with a hand? It not only meets 4-15-4(a), it also meets 4-15-4(b).

The facts from the original post are that the ball came to rest while in contact with the dribbler's hand. That ain't gonna change, no matter what linguistic magic you might try to weave.

The rule requires more than contact with the dribbler's hand. It requires the dribbler to be the cause in both a and b.

So you're calling a travel in the OP?

Um, no. See post #33 above. Ball might be at rest but there isn't any player control imo. And you can't call it a held ball either because the defender didn't have their hand(s) on the ball.

Fair enough. I assume you'll allow a new dribble, then, since another player touched it during the period of lost control.

So?:confused:

Didn't the dribbler cause the ball to come to rest by pinning it on the defender's hip? Didn't the dribbler also allow the ball to come to rest in one hand when it was pinned also?

The question now is whether the dribbler had player control or not when the ball does come to rest. As I said, that is a judgment call.

Yup. As I said, it's a judgment call imo as to whether the dribbler actually had player control when the ball was at rest. And if the dribbler couldn't immediately dribble again or shoot/pass, then I personally can't see where player control was present. And if there's no player control because of a touch by an opponent, rule 9-5 comes into play.

But mileage may vary as it is a judgment call. I'd leave it up to the calling official.

I can buy that; but I really don't think this meets the requirement for resting in his hand when he's trying to push it to the floor. Just me, though.

By my reading of the OP, no the dribbler didn't cause the ball to be pinned, the defender did. This obviously is going to be a judgment call.

If, however, you judge that the dribbler pinned it, you must call traveling. If the dribbler pins it, he has ended his dribble by holding the ball. Since he is holding the ball, he has player control and is subject to the traveling restrictions.

So you have a choice: either the dribble didn't end because A1 isn't holding the ball or A1 lifted and returned his pivot foot to the floor while holding the ball.

The rule you cite defines what a player may or may not do while holding the ball but exactly where do the rules define "holding"? That is really the essence of this situation.

I think this situation actually exposes a hole in the rules.


Here is what I think:

• A1 is not dribbling the ball...dribbing is "ball movement"
• A1 is not holding the ball...therefore no travel.
• It is not an interrupted dribble as it hasn't gotten away from A1
• B1 hasn't earned a held ball

I think we have one big ugly nothing.

And that's exactly why it's a judgment call imo.

You're problem is that A1 was dribbling so unless he started holding the ball, he has not ended his dribble.

+1

I think it's a "double violation." (rule 11-3)

Go to the POI, but do it without the whistle.

I agree with 1, 3, and 4. Still, if A1 pinned the ball against A2's leg, and both took steps, was it not established that we would have a travel, even though A1 still would not be holding the ball?

If A1 is the cause of the ball being pinned anywhere, it's traveling as he has caused the ball to rest in his hand and thus ended his dribble.

The only way in the OP you don't call traveling is if you judge that B1 caused the ball to be pinned so A1's dribble hasn't ended. If you don't have a dribble, A1 has violated.

Exactly, then we refer back to the calling official in the OP which was a travel.

There's no way you can call a travel if A1 isn't holding the ball. There are two exceptions to that requirement, and this isn't one of them.

Maybe there are three exceptions? ;)

I'll call that an attempt to circumvent the rules and call it a travel.

That would be like the play where the player who is on the floor sets the ball down, gets up, then picks up the ball. That is ruled a travel by interpretation, not exactly by rule, becasue it is viewed as an attempt to circumvent the travel rule in a way that was not intended.

+1