Bob, there are 43 threads in which Billy has posted "excessive" jokes. In 14 of them, you've objected -- more than anyone else.

Cut it out.

Please.

For the record, Bob said what I was thinking.

I personally like the elegance of saying that since he hit his foot he didn't push the ball to the floor but to his foot and therefore didn't start a dribble.

Captain Kangaroo's Magic Words, Please, And Thank You ...
 

I also, from the get go, found it to be an interesting intellectual challange. In most of my posts I not only voiced my opinion, and my reasons for said opinion, but also chose to use "pretend" parlimentary procedure, a chess game, and later a poker game, analogy to challenge others to keep the debate going. Seldom did I just post an analogy.

Appreciate the "Please".

Regarding the OP being legal, how about my followup situation?

A1 receives a pass and releases the ball to start a dribble. The ball hits the top of his foot, never touching the floor, and bounces straight up. A1 then catches the ball with both hands, and starts a new dribble? What do you got?

If I really saw that, legal (assuming there was no other violation).

In practice, I think I'd think the ball had hit the floor.

Fumble, Dribble ...
 

Would you consider tihs a fumble followed by a dribble?

Fumble, Dribble ...
 

Would you consider this a fumble followed by a dribble?

After going through the dribble and travel rules, assuming that "to the floor" means the ball has to hit the floor to be a "dribble", the play is legal if the player doesnt travel before hand. If this would happen during a dribble, it would be a an illegal dribble in billy's play.


Though I think this play would only occur in bizzarro world because I still cannot imagine any situation to where a dribbler can do this without another player touching the ball.

I'll take a try...
 

Kicked ball? My reason being, anyone able to get the ball to come immediately back to him may be doing some "purposeful maneuvering" meaning intent. I don't know that I would call that, nobody else has suggested it.

Methinks you're assuming a little too much. By rule (4-15-3), the dribble started when the ball was pushed, thrown or batted to the floor. Iow, when the ball left the dribbler's hand(s).

Are you saying a player that:
1) it's legal to touch the ball twice before the ball hits the floor for the first time
on a dribble?
2) A player can travel during a dribble?

Interesting.

Explanation as to why it's legal? Scrappy said that the ball was released to start a dribble and the ball was then touched twice by the dribbler before the ball hit the floor. That double-touch was during the same dribble, wasn't it? The definition of a "dribble" says that you push the ball to the floor, not to a foot. What am I missing?

If we follow that this is the same as the case play, then it would have to be an illegal dribble any time a player begins a dribble and the ball hits off his foot-even if the ball goes to a defender.

Agree?

Why?

Um, no. Afaik, by rule touching any other body part except the hand(s) during any single dribble is completely irrelevant. It's a violation to touch the ball twice with either hand during any single dribble. But simultaneously touching the ball with both hands isn't a violation. Doing so merely ends the dribble.

The usual understanding of a single dribble, again afaik, is hand--->floor---->hand. And if you touch the ball twice with a hand at any time between the total hand---->floor sequence, it's a violation.

Well, I'm asking. If the violation is for touching a dribble twice before it hits the floor (which is what it appears to me JR is saying), then any time a player begins a dribble and dribbles it off a foot (or knee, gut, head, whatever), that would be touching a dribble twice.

If I'm misreading what Jurassic is arguing, then I need straightened out. Perhaps he's saying that the player catching the ball off his foot is the second touching?