block = jump ball?

[DownTownTonyBrown]

I have discovered that often during our discussions we argue both sides of a situation that we have been unable to adequately portray to all the readers.

Was the defensive contact momentary such that the shooter couldn't do a good job of shooting the ball but could immediately make another attempt for a try? Did the defender come down with his hand still firmly on the ball? Are the player now fighting for control of the ball and do we have a jump ball situation per part 1 of the rule? AP

Obviously (as Juulie pointed out), part two of the rule is to prevent a travel call - airborne shooter is coming back to the floor with the ball still in his hands - defense has done a good job to create this situation. AP

If however the offense has done a good job by not jumping, still has individual control of the ball, then let him shoot or drive or whatever.

Gotta see the whole play to make a good call here.

[Hawks Coach]

I agree with SamNVA that the held ball on the airborn shooter was to eliminate the up and down call when the ball was stopped by the defense. This interpretation also shows that the rule does not reward good defense, because the ruling would be a travel if the intent was to reward the defense.

I also agree with DTTB that you need to see it to call it. An extended period of time with shooter pushing the ball into the defender's hand and the defender pushing back might be a clear held ball. But a stoppage of the initial shooting or passing motion where the defender's hand slides off the ball afterwards does not seem to fit the bill to me. This is different from where a shooter is in the air, because that momentary stoppage of motion usually causes the player to return to the floor without a release and is an automatic held ball.

And what is this about a team calling timeout? A defender with one hand pushing the ball does not have control - how can the defense get a TO in this situation?

[Nevadaref]

Originally posted by Hawks Coach
And what is this about a team calling timeout? A defender with one hand pushing the ball does not have control - how can the defense get a TO in this situation?

I agree. A player doesn't have control, if he simply puts his hand on the ball. I don't care how long he is touching it. Therefore, no time-out should be granted, nor should a jump ball be called unless the situation is as stated in article 2.

[BktBallRef]

Originally posted by Nevadaref
I agree. A player doesn't have control, if he simply puts his hand on the ball. I don't care how long he is touching it.

Now you're the one not following the rule.

That's the whole point: neither player is controlling the ball.


A held ball occurs when:
Opponents have their hands so firmly on the ball that control cannot be obtained without undue roughness.

If the defender puts his hand on the ball and prevents the offensive player from moving it, it's a held ball.

[Nevadaref]

I take that wording to mean there is no individual control. I believe that a during a held ball as defined in article 1, both players have control. This is called joint control. Since player control is defined as holding or dribbling a live ball inbounds, if both players are holding the ball then both have control. That is why it is called a held ball!
But if one player is holding the ball and an opponent simply puts a hand on the ball, only the first player has control.

This joint control concept is not just something that I made up either. It is in the casebook. Play 4.43.2 B talks about A1 and A2 having joint control.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by Nevadaref
Since player control is defined as holding or dribbling a live ball inbounds, if both players are holding the ball then both have control. That is why it is called a held ball!

But if one player is holding the ball and an opponent simply puts a hand on the ball, only the first player has control.

What is the difference in the two cases above?In the 2nd. case,if the opponent puts his hand on the ball,and(in the official's opinion) the player with the ball then can't do anything with it,why isn't this joint possession also?Both players are holding the ball.The only difference is that one of them is only holding it with one hand,but that one hand still fits within the rulebook definition of player control.Doesn't the same reasoning apply as in the first case?

It's not a tough rule to call.It's a jump ball if players from different teams have player possession at the same time,so that neither player can do anything with it.It's just the official's judgement if that tenet applies.

[BktBallRef]

Originally posted by Nevadaref
I take that wording to mean there is no individual control. I believe that a during a held ball as defined in article 1, both players have control. This is called joint control. Since player control is defined as holding or dribbling a live ball inbounds, if both players are holding the ball then both have control. That is why it is called a held ball!
But if one player is holding the ball and an opponent simply puts a hand on the ball, only the first player has control.

This joint control concept is not just something that I made up either. It is in the casebook. Play 4.43.2 B talks about A1 and A2 having joint control.

You're making stuff up, Nevada. I'm not going to waste my time referencing rules when you're bouncing myths around. Jurassic is correct, it's not a difficult call to make.

Take care!

[Nevadaref]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

What is the difference in the two cases above?

JR, To me there is a clear difference between just putting a hand on the ball and holding the ball. My test would be if you removed the other player would the player with only one hand touching the ball be able to hold it in that position. If not, he clearly does not have control.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

It's a jump ball if players from different teams have player possession at the same time,so that neither player can do anything with it.It's just the official's judgement if that tenet applies.

I agree that there is judgment involved in making a held ball call, but I disagree with your standard. You have twice referred to a player not being able to do anything with the ball. I have never heard of this being used as a way to judge a held ball. I only go by the undue roughness standard given in the rules book.
If I were holding the ball with both hands, I don't see how an opponent could possibly make it such that I could not obtain clear control without using undue roughness by only placing one hand against the ball.
I am unconvinced that his hand touching the ball constitutes holding the ball for the purpose of control. Well, maybe if my opponent were Dr. J and he used his enormous hand to wrap almost entirely around the ball....

I just thought of a play that I'd like your and Tony's opinions on. I'll post it in a new thread.

PS Tony, no one is going to agree with your statement that I am making stuff up in that last post. I even went the extra mile to quote a play from the NFHS case book to prove my assertion that joint control is a valid and accepted concept.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally posted by Nevadaref
Sorry guys, this does not fit the definition of held ball.
4-25 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.

The situation at hand does not seem to fit into article 1 and clearly does not fall under article 2 since this part specifies airborne player.

Merry Chrismas and Happy New Year everybody!! My family and I got back from a week visiting family in Orlando this afternoon, so I am joining the thread a little late.

Nevada is absolutely correct. The play as described in the original post is nothing. The first rule of officiating basketball is: you have nothing until you have something. In the original post nothing happened. Let play continue and let the howler monkeys howl. Second rule of all sports officiating is: don't call anything you can't explain, and easily applied to this play.

Too many officials look for something where there really is nothing.

[Hawks Coach]

Originally posted by BktBallRef

Now you're the one not following the rule.

That's the whole point: neither player is controlling the ball.


A held ball occurs when:
Opponents have their hands so firmly on the ball that control cannot be obtained without undue roughness.

If the defender puts his hand on the ball and prevents the offensive player from moving it, it's a held ball.

If a defender has one hand on the ball and the ball is not on the floor, the ball can be easily moved away from the defender's hand without undue roughness. This rule generally only applies when each player has two hands on the ball.

I think it is a huge stretch to say that a defender placing a hand on the ball causes the offensive player to lose player control.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by Hawks Coach
[/B]

If a defender has one hand on the ball and the ball is not on the floor, the ball can be easily moved away from the defender's hand without undue roughness. This rule generally only applies when each player has two hands on the ball.

I think it is a huge stretch to say that a defender placing a hand on the ball causes the offensive player to lose player control. [/B][/QUOTE]Let' see now:
1)A1 is on the floor with the ball trapped firmly between his arm and his body.B1 is lying next to him with his hands on the ball.
2)A1 is lying on the floor with the ball trapped firmly between his legs.B1,lying partially on him,has one hand on the ball.
In both cases,the ball is caught(or pinned)firmly enough that neither player can do anything with it.
In both cases,Nevada and Coach say that it is not a jump ball.

Please tell me what what I do call in these cases,if anything.Or do I just let 'em wrassle around until the ball comes loose or one player ends up with both hands on it.

The intent of the rule is to call a held ball when two opposing players have enough equal control of the ball that their opposite number is unable to do anything with it(dribble,pass,shoot,etc.).That's how we judge it,and that's how we call it.

[SamNVa]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee:

Let's(sic) see now:
1)A1 is on the floor with the ball trapped firmly between his arm and his body.B1 is lying next to him with his hands on the ball.
2)A1 is lying on the floor with the ball trapped firmly between his legs.B1,lying partially on him,has one hand on the ball.
In both cases,the ball is caught(or pinned)firmly enough that neither player can do anything with it.
In both cases,Nevada and Coach say that it is not a jump ball.

Mr. Jurassic Referee,

I don't NevadaRef or Hawks Coach would have a problem calling a held ball in either of the two situations you describe. I know that I would not. However the original situation was a set shot being blocked by a defender. In this case, I can't imagine a situation where the offensive player would not be able to easily pull the ball away from the defender. That's why generally I would not call a held ball in that case, of course as DTTB stated, all situations like this are HTBT calls.

SamC

[Hawks Coach]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

If a defender has one hand on the ball and the ball is not on the floor, the ball can be easily moved away from the defender's hand without undue roughness. This rule generally only applies when each player has two hands on the ball.

I think it is a huge stretch to say that a defender placing a hand on the ball causes the offensive player to lose player control. [/B]

Let' see now:
1)A1 is on the floor with the ball trapped firmly between his arm and his body.B1 is lying next to him with his hands on the ball.
2)A1 is lying on the floor with the ball trapped firmly between his legs.B1,lying partially on him,has one hand on the ball.
In both cases,the ball is caught(or pinned)firmly enough that neither player can do anything with it.
In both cases,Nevada and Coach say that it is not a jump ball.

Please tell me what what I do call in these cases,if anything.Or do I just let 'em wrassle around until the ball comes loose or one player ends up with both hands on it.

The intent of the rule is to call a held ball when two opposing players have enough equal control of the ball that their opposite number is unable to do anything with it(dribble,pass,shoot,etc.).That's how we judge it,and that's how we call it. [/B][/QUOTE]

JR
You are completely off the original case, where a shot or a pass attempt is pushed back at the offensive player. Tony has been trying to argue that you could apply the first part of the held ball rule to this specific situation. I do not argue that there is never a time when the ball can get pinned by one hand - just that the blocked set shot and blocked pass is not one of those times where you can invoke the first held ball provision. I agree completely with calling the held ball in the case you cite.

I am merely trying to makie the point that the blocked shot attempt when a shooter is airborn and returns to the floor is a very specific situation covered by rule that has nothing to do with the first, and most commonly invoked, held ball provision.

[Jurassic Referee]

The language of the very first post of this thread states "blocks the set shot so it CAN'T be released and the ball is SUSPENDED,and WOULD DEFINITELY BE A HELD BALL IF THIS WAS A JUMP SHOT". What I'm trying to point out,guys,is that if the official thought that it met the definition and criteria of a held ball,then it IS a held ball-no matter where it occurs.

I've been referring to the description given above in all my responses.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by Hawks Coach
[/B]

I think it is a huge stretch to say that a defender placing a hand on the ball causes the offensive player to lose player control. [/B][/QUOTE]
You are completely off the original case, where a shot or a pass attempt is pushed back at the offensive player. Tony has been trying to argue that you could apply the first part of the held ball rule to this specific situation. I do not argue that there is never a time when the ball can get pinned by one hand - just that the blocked set shot and blocked pass is not one of those times where you can invoke the first held ball provision. I agree completely with calling the held ball in the case you cite.

I am merely trying to make the point that the blocked shot attempt when a shooter is airborn and returns to the floor is a very specific situation covered by rule that has nothing to do with the first, and most commonly invoked, held ball provision. [/B][/QUOTE]Coach,we do agree on the last point that you wrote above.
Now,quoting Nevada who said "but if one player is holding the ball and an opponent simply puts a hand on the ball,only the first player has control",my points still are:
1)If,in the official's opinion,the opponent puts his one hand on the ball so that the player originally holding the ball cannot shoot,dribble,pass or wind his watch,then you have to call a held ball.
2)With regards to your 1st. statement above,I'm also saying that a defensive player placing one hand on the ball could POSSIBLY cause the offensive player to lose solitary player control.That's up to the opinion of the official.That's why I quoted those different situations-to try and point out that fact.That's also why I agreed with Tony that you use the first part of the definition.It's all-purpose language,and it's the only language that we have available to us to use(including having to use it in those other situations that I cited).