Legal dribble or not?

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Violation for touching the ball twice during the same dribble, as per the RULING of 4.15.4SitD(a)-"Violation because the ball was touched twice by A1's hand(s) during a dribble before it touched the floor."

So if a player is holding the ball, tosses it from one hand to the other, then pushes it to the floor, is that a violation?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by just another ref

So if a player is holding the ball, tosses it from one hand to the other, then pushes it to the floor, is that a violation?

No, because the dribble doesn't start until he pushes it to the floor. This call hinges completely on whether A1 has to bat the ball "into the air" in order to be liable for this violation.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

No, because the dribble doesn't start until he pushes it to the floor.

That was my point above.

And even if it is during the dribble, I see the ball hitting a foot the same as hitting the floor. What if it's an opponent's foot? It hits and comes straight back up to the dribbler's hand, (very unlikely I know, but no more unlikely than off his own foot) is this a violation?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by just another ref

That was my point above.

And even if it is during the dribble, I see the ball hitting a foot the same as hitting the floor. What if it's an opponent's foot? It hits and comes straight back up to the dribbler's hand, (very unlikely I know, but no more unlikely than off his own foot) is this a violation?

Opponents foot, I'd consider that an interrupted dribble that touches an opponent. New dribble.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Opponents foot, I'd consider that an interrupted dribble that touches an opponent. New dribble.

It's not an interrupted dribble because it didn't get away from the dribbler. It came straight back up. That is very unlikely, maybe even impossible, but it's still a given. The dribble didn't end, because the touch by the opponent caused no loss of control.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by just another ref

It's not an interrupted dribble because it didn't get away from the dribbler. It came straight back up. That is very unlikely, maybe even impossible, but it's still a given. The dribble didn't end, because the touch by the opponent caused no loss of control.

I'm considering this an interrupted dribble. The fact that a dribbler cannot possibly intend to dribble off his opponent's foot tells me that if it does, it got away from him. The fact that it, by a fluke of physics, bounced straight back to him does not change this, IMO.

[BillyMac]

Anything that I deemed, I now undeem.

I don't have another move because I'm stuck on the floor. Literally. The "pushes the ball to the floor" part of the definition is confusing me.