Interrupted dribble

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by justacoach

I think you are taking liberties with the well defined term 'interrupted dribble'.

Not at all. He lost control of the dribble.

[justacoach]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Not at all. He lost control of the dribble.

It matters not how we define his obvious loss of control, the intervening touch by another player eliminates the possible call for illegal dribble, or travel for that matter. Only potential violation, as I mentioned above, is kicked ball, if you deem intentional contact w/ B player's foot.
I can't imagine why you come with this pedestrian a query. Is it possible you are invested in some of your legendary over parsing of a mundane sitch?

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by justacoach

It matters not how we define his obvious loss of control, the intervening touch by another player eliminates the possible call for illegal dribble, or travel for that matter. Only potential violation, as I mentioned above, is kicked ball, if you deem intentional contact w/ B player's foot.
I can't imagine why you come with this pedestrian a query. Is it possible you are invested in some of your legendary over parsing of a mundane sitch?

Here's the deal. This happened tonight. After receiving a pass over the top of a press, A1 lost control of the dribble, retrieved the ball in both hands, and started another dribble. I was trail, quite a way behind the play. I did not actually see the ball touch the foot, but Coach A helped me. "He kicked it!" I'm fairly certain that it was not an actual kick, nor was the coach asking for one, but rather was saying that this gave A1 the right to start another dribble. I don't see that it does. If contact by B1 had caused the loss of control, yes, it ends the dribble. But contact was lost before the contact, (I think) so I see this play as a violation. Had I seen contact with the foot, what would I have done? Can't say. But in hindsight, I think I accidentally made the right call.

[justacoach]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Here's the deal. This happened tonight. After receiving a pass over the top of a press, A1 lost control of the dribble, retrieved the ball in both hands, and started another dribble. I was trail, quite a way behind the play. I did not actually see the ball touch the foot, but Coach A helped me. "He kicked it!" I'm fairly certain that it was not an actual kick, nor was the coach asking for one, but rather was saying that this gave A1 the right to start another dribble. I don't see that it does. If contact by B1 had caused the loss of control, yes, it ends the dribble. But contact was lost before the contact, (I think) so I see this play as a violation. Had I seen contact with the foot, what would I have done? Can't say. But in hindsight, I think I accidentally made the right call.

Now that you have provided the denoument, which does not make mention of any ball contact by another player, I concur and support your surmise of illegal dribble violation.
However..
If the eye-in-the-sky shows the ball accidentally contacting another player, as declared in the OP, I think you got some 'splaining to do...

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by justacoach

If the eye-in-the-sky shows the ball accidentally contacting another player, as declared in the OP, I think you got some 'splaining to do...

Why?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by just another ref

I didn't say that, I asked the question. If an interrupted dribble is touched by an opponent, does that end the dribble? I see no rule which says it does.

You did say that; at least that's how I read this post:

Originally Posted by just another ref

Here's the deal. This happened tonight. After receiving a pass over the top of a press, A1 lost control of the dribble, retrieved the ball in both hands, and started another dribble. I was trail, quite a way behind the play. I did not actually see the ball touch the foot, but Coach A helped me. "He kicked it!" I'm fairly certain that it was not an actual kick, nor was the coach asking for one, but rather was saying that this gave A1 the right to start another dribble. I don't see that it does. If contact by B1 had caused the loss of control, yes, it ends the dribble. But contact was lost before the contact, (I think) so I see this play as a violation. Had I seen contact with the foot, what would I have done? Can't say. But in hindsight, I think I accidentally made the right call.

Unless you're also saying a fumble would give you the same ruling as your post above.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

You did say that; at least that's how I read this post:



Unless you're also saying a fumble would give you the same ruling as your post above.

Nobody mentioned a fumble until JR. There definitely was not a fumble. Player had a dribble, then lost control resulting in an interrupted dribble. Ball then touched/was touched by the defender. Dribbler then picked the ball up with both hands. Can he legally start a new dribble after this sequence? I don't see how, but I entertain other opinions.

[justacoach]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Nobody mentioned a fumble until JR.

FWIW, I did, in post #2 of this thread, and provided a well reasoned refutation to your improper call and your improper characterization of this action as 'interrupted dribble'.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Player had a dribble, then lost control resulting in an interrupted dribble. Ball then touched/was touched by the defender. Dribbler then picked the ball up with both hands. Can he legally start a new dribble after this sequence?

Yes as per NFHS case book play 4.15.4SitE. It's the exact same play. You had an interrupted dribble that touched an opponent. That ended the interrupted dribble. So the dribbler could recover and dribble again.

The case play just says "dribble". It didn't say that it only applies to one certain specific type of dribble though. Go with what you got. And what you got is sureashell good enough imo.

Rules rulz!

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Yes as per NFHS case book play 4.15.4SitE. It's the exact same play. You had an interrupted dribble that touched an opponent. That ended the interrupted dribble. So the dribbler could recover and dribble again.

The case play just says "dribble". It didn't say that it only applies to one certain specific type of dribble though. Go with what you got. And what you got is sureashell good enough imo.

Rules rulz!

The key to the case play is that the touch caused the loss of control, which is not what happened in my play. Is it the intent that the touch would still end the dribble? Probably Is it written that way? No