What's The Correct Call ???

[bainsey]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Player control is the only relevant issue here...

It looks like that's the crux of our difference. I say team control is relevant, because if team control were lost (i.e. a try for goal), then a travel for recovering the ball would indeed be impossible. However, since team control remained throughout (i.e. the ball travelling through the air, not a shot), then travelling is still possible, IMO.

Let's change it slightly again. A1 fumbles the ball (already used his dribble) in the air. Runs to get it and bats it in the air. He runs to get it, and bats it again (outjumps a defender) before taking two more steps to retrieve the ball. Call?

Good question. Assuming he's he holding the ball prior to the fumble, it would depend upon the bats. If he's batting to chase down the ball in any direction, then I'd let it go. If he's clearly intentionally trying to move the ball to a certain spot, then I'd equate that to the ball being thrown in the air and caught by the same player, so I'd have a travel.

I suppose the issue is whether you think a fumble gives a player carte blanche to move the ball as he sees fit. I don't think so.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by bainsey

It looks like that's the crux of our difference. I say team control is relevant, because if team control were lost (i.e. a try for goal), then a travel for recovering the ball would indeed be impossible. However, since team control remained throughout (i.e. the ball travelling through the air, not a shot), then travelling is still possible, IMO.

I say you have no rules basis for this distinction. Player control is required to travel, and batting the ball very specifically does not constitute player control.

Originally Posted by bainsey

Good question. Assuming he's he holding the ball prior to the fumble, it would depend upon the bats. If he's batting to chase down the ball in any direction, then I'd let it go. If he's clearly intentionally trying to move the ball to a certain spot, then I'd equate that to the ball being thrown in the air and caught by the same player, so I'd have a travel.

I suppose the issue is whether you think a fumble gives a player carte blanche to move the ball as he sees fit. I don't think so.

No, the issue is whether you can add stuff to the rules to distinguish between different plays that really, in the end, use the same rules. There is no rule-based distinction between the rebound-bat and the fumble-bat plays.

Again, a controlled bat does not equal player control no matter how much you want it to.

[bainsey]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Player control is required to travel, and batting the ball very specifically does not constitute player control.

Very well, then.

We've established that holding a ball, throwing it (not a try), running several steps, and catching it is travelling.

Let's say A-1 holds the ball, tosses it in the air, BATS IT, runs several steps, and catches it. Is this legal?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by bainsey

Very well, then.

We've established that holding a ball, throwing it (not a try), running several steps, and catching it is travelling.

Let's say A-1 holds the ball, tosses it in the air, BATS IT, runs several steps, and catches it. Is this legal?

Nope. That's an illegal dribble that has recently been unceremoniously changed to a travel. The key to the play in the OP is the fact that the player traveled and thus ended player control.

[bainsey]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

That's an illegal dribble that has recently been unceremoniously changed to a travel.

Then, it's a travel. What it used to be is irrelevant.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by bainsey

Then, it's a travel. What it used to be is irrelevant.

No, it's not irrelevant. It's a violation because it's a dribble that fails to hit the floor between consecutive touches by the hands of the player in control.

But we're diverging from the point. The point is, without the fumble, the same rules don't apply.