Backcourt and an interrupted dribble

[Rob1968]

A1 dribbling, advancing from backcourt to frontcourt, left foot in backcourt, right foot in frontcourt, dribbling the ball in the frontcourt, misses a dribble for two bounces of the ball, then regains dribble control of the ball with the right hand, with the same foot positions, and dribbling the ball in the frontcourt.
Thinking of 4-4-6, ball location during a dribble from backcourt to frontcourt, and 4-4-1 and 2, it seems like the call could be a backcourt violation, as the ball, during the two non-dribbled bounces, had obtained frontcourt status. However, the wording in Case Book 4.15.4 D RULING (b) cast doubt on whether the dribble had ended, and might lead one to think that 4-4-6 applies, and therefore a backcourt violation had not occurred.
The play looked, and seemed odd. I called a backcourt violation. Please, give me some opinions.

Thanks,
Rob1968

[BillyMac]

In order for a dribbler to obtain frontcourt status, the ball, and both feet, must obtain frontcourt status. From the description of the play, it doesn't sound like the left foot ever obtained frontcourt status, thus, no backcourt violation. Also, I believe that the dribble didn't end, it was just interrupted.

[Raymond]

"interrupted dribble"--seems to me that the dribble has not ended.

[Rob1968]

So, if the dribble hasn't ended, and was just interrupted, the 10-second count would continue. (This wasn't a factor in the play, but is a thought that occurred during my searching for rule support for a correct ruling.) It seems that the two unattended bounces could establish frontcourt status for the ball, similar to Case Book 9.8 situation B. 4-12-1 indicates that there is no player control, during the interrupted dribble, and 4-12-2 c indicates that there is team control, during the interrupted dribble, and 9-9-1 could be involved, thius causing a backcourt violation. Comments?

[Camron Rust]

A player is not dribbling and is not a dribbler during an interrupted dribble.

The OOB rules establish that concept....the ball is OOB if a dribbler steps OOB during the dribble even if they don't actually touch the ball while they are OOB. But, if it is an interrupted dribble, the ball is not OOB as long as the player returns inbounds before resuming the dribble.

When the dribble is interrupted, the player is no longer dribbling and is not a dribbler. They may resume dribbling, but they are not currently dribbling.

Additionally, they can not commit a player control foul during an interrupted dribble. As of the last few years, they can commit a team control foul which makes the result the same but the point is that they are not, by definition, dribbling if the dribble is interrupted and are not a dribbler during the interruption. If they were, it would have been a PC foul.

The 3-points rule exists to allow a player who is continuously dribbling the freedom to not worry about their specific foot/ball movement when they are near and/or crossing the line....they have to be fully across to be considered across.

All that said, one or two extra bounces doesn't mean the dribble is interrupted. There is nothing in the dribble rule that says the player must touch the ball between every bounce...even if they try but miss. An interrupted dribble is one where the ball gets away from the player. Did they have to move to go get the ball or did they just miss the dribble and continue after a whiff at the ball? I wouldn't call it an interrupted dribble unless they had to chase down the ball.


My conclusion....If it was an interrupted dribble (and it may not have been), they do not have protection of the 3-points rule and it is a backcourt violation when they again touch the ball.

[tref]

This is good for discussion!
I guess the only question that matters here is, is a dribbler still considered a dribbler during an interupted dribble?

Theres no player control during this situation so the ball now has f/c status, he regains control but with a foot in the b/c... violation

*I hate when they goof up near the division line*

NEVERMIND Camron cleared that up!!

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by tref

I hate when they goof up near the division line.

Amen. Silly kids.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

A player is not dribbling and is not a dribbler during an interrupted dribble.

The OOB rules establish that concept....the ball is OOB if a dribbler steps OOB during the dribble even if they don't actually touch the ball while they are OOB. But, if it is an interrupted dribble, the ball is not OOB as long as the player returns inbounds before resuming the dribble.

When the dribble is interrupted, the player is no longer dribbling and is not a dribbler. They may resume dribbling, but they are not currently dribbling.

Additionally, they can not commit a player control foul during an interrupted dribble. As of the last few years, they can commit a team control foul which makes the result the same but the point is that they are not, by definition, dribbling if the dribble is interrupted and are not a dribbler during the interruption. If they were, it would have been a PC foul.

The 3-points rule exists to allow a player who is continuously dribbling the freedom to not worry about their specific foot/ball movement when they are near and/or crossing the line....they have to be fully across to be considered across.

All that said, one or two extra bounces doesn't mean the dribble is interrupted. There is nothing in the dribble rule that says the player must touch the ball between every bounce...even if they try but miss. An interrupted dribble is one where the ball gets away from the player. Did they have to move to go get the ball or did they just miss the dribble and continue after a whiff at the ball? I wouldn't call it an interrupted dribble unless they had to chase down the ball.


My conclusion....If it was an interrupted dribble (and it may not have been), they do not have protection of the 3-points rule and it is a backcourt violation when they again touch the ball.

I agree with the above.

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by tref

I guess the only question that matters here is, is a dribbler still considered a dribbler during an interupted dribble?

The only question that matter is "Was it an interrupted dribble or not?"

I believe I would try to give the player the benefit of doubt and rule that it wasn't an interrupted dribble.