Passing ball to self

[MiamiWadeCounty]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

It violated rule 4-44-3a. The pivot foot may be lifted, but not returned to the floor, before the ball is released on a pass or try for goal.

I get it now. I was totally disregarding the fact that the pivot foot may not be return back to the floor if the pass hasn't touch another player. The problem was that I thought traveling can only occur when a player is holding the ball.

However if A1 never established a pivot foot the rule doesn't cover that as a traveling violation. So it would have to be an illegal dribble. However I can't find in the rule book or case book anything that refers to it as an illegal dribble.

4.44.3 SITUATION B: A1 receives the ball with both feet off the floor and he/she lands simultaneously on both feet without establishing a pivot foot. A1 then jumps off both feet in an attempt to try for goal, but realizing the shot may be blocked, A1 drops the ball to the floor and dribbles. RULING: A1 has traveled as one foot must be considered to be the pivot and must be on the floor when the ball is released to start a dribble. The fact that no pivot foot had been established does not alter this ruling.

[btaylor64]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

The play is legal. There's a case play under 7.1. Take a look.

Bball ref: So you are saying it is always legal??? So if a guy goes to save the ball and cups it in a controlled manner and gently tosses it back onto the floor, re-establishes himself on the floor, that is legal, under HS rules is what I'm asking. I definitely believe it is legal if a player just bats/smacks the ball (no control) and comes back onto the floor and is the first to touch bc he had never controlled the ball.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by btaylor64

Bball ref: So you are saying it is always legal??? So if a guy goes to save the ball and cups it in a controlled manner and gently tosses it back onto the floor, re-establishes himself on the floor, that is legal, under HS rules is what I'm asking. I definitely believe it is legal if a player just bats/smacks the ball (no control) and comes back onto the floor and is the first to touch bc he had never controlled the ball.

Yes it is legal if A1 has not used his dribble yet. No different than if A1 is standing by himself and throws the ball in front him and goes to retrieve it after it bounces. If he had not used his dribble it is legal, if has already used his dribble than you have an illegal dribble.

[Rob1968]

It seems we're addressing several different situations in this thread. When A1 throws the ball and moves his pivot foot to catch the ball before it hits the floor, it is considered to be traveling, 4.44.3 D (b), because the ball did not touch the floor, therefore the toss of the ball doesn't meet the definition of the start of a dribble, 4-15-3. Yes, it is a vague, (actually not mentioned) part of the travel rule, but understood and accepted universally, that even though A1 is not holding the ball, during the movement of the pivot foot, it is traveling, to throw the ball and then catch it after moving the pivot foot, and before the ball touches the floor, or another player, or his own backbourd. Hence, the description of "passing the ball to oneself", is illegal. (Of course, we get into the facet of whether the toss of the ball was judged by the covering official to be a valid shot attempt, but that is yet another adjunct to the discussion.)
When the ball is again controlled by A1, after the ball has hit the floor, the element of whether A1 had used his dribble, before the toss, comes into consideration, in judging whether the actions constitute a double dribble. 7.1.1 considers that the ball hits the floor, inbounds, before A1 again controls it.
Although the following scenario is highly unlikely, it may illustrate the differences noted above: Supposing that A1 leaps in the air, catches the ball that was headed out-of-bounds, tosses it high enough so that after A1 lands out-of-bounds, he recovers and returns inbounds and then catches the ball, before it hits the floor. Is there a violation? In my thoughts, because A1 was airborne when he caught the ball, and threw it back over the playing surface, there would be no violation. However, if A1 had a foot or feet touching the playing surface and tossed the ball high enough so that after his momentum carried him out-of-bounds, he recovered, re-established himself inbounds, and then caught the ball before it hit the playing surface, we would consider his actions to be traveling, as expressed above.
Ah, the minutia of it all . . .

[MiamiWadeCounty]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

jar gave you the appropriate case play but the case play is wrong. By rule, it's an illegal dribble. Traveling is moving the pivot foot outside prescribed limits while HOLDING the ball. A1 isn't holding the ball when he lifts his pivot.

The correct ruling was listed for years. Then, a few seasons ago, some Einstein changed the ruling.

Can you tell me why it should be an illegal dribble and not traveling? You said by rule, but which rule?

[APG]

Originally Posted by MiamiWadeCounty

Can you tell me why it should be an illegal dribble and not traveling? You said by rule, but which rule?

If you consider the toss of the ball as the start of the dribble, then the player has violated by not permitting the ball to strike the floor before the ball is touched again with the hand(s) as is required by 4-15-2.

In reality, no coach is going to get on your case if you call an illegal dribble/travel.

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by MiamiWadeCounty

I get it now. I was totally disregarding the fact that the pivot foot may not be return back to the floor if the pass hasn't touch another player. The problem was that I thought traveling can only occur when a player is holding the ball.

I have no idea what that means. Your pivot foot has nothing to do with when or whther another player touches the ball.

You are correct that a player cannot travel unless he is holding the ball, with one exception.

4.44.3 SITUATION B:

A1 receives the ball with both feet off the floor and he/she lands simultaneously on both feet without establishing a pivot foot. A1 then jumps off both feet in an attempt to try for goal, but realizing the shot may be blocked, A1 drops the ball to the floor and dribbles. RULING: A1 has traveled as one foot must be considered to be the pivot and must be on the floor when the ball is released to start a dribble. The fact that no pivot foot had been established does not alter this ruling.

The case play has nothing to do with the play you originally posted.

[MiamiWadeCounty]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

If you consider the toss of the ball as the start of the dribble, then the player has violated by not permitting the ball to strike the floor before the ball is touched again with the hand(s) as is required by 4-15-2.

The player has violated even if he never moved his pivot foot?

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by btaylor64

Bball ref: So you are saying it is always legal??? So if a guy goes to save the ball and cups it in a controlled manner and gently tosses it back onto the floor, re-establishes himself on the floor, that is legal, under HS rules is what I'm asking. I definitely believe it is legal if a player just bats/smacks the ball (no control) and comes back onto the floor and is the first to touch bc he had never controlled the ball.

Yes, it's always legal. The original question concerned whether a player could save a ball from going OOB, go OOB himself and then return and be the first touch the ball. Yes he can.

Now, the play you describe is legal. However, if he controls the ball, throws it back inbounds, returns and catches the ball, he cannot legally dribble the ball, as he has essentially already used his dribble.

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by MiamiWadeCounty

The player has violated even if he never moved his pivot foot?

No. He has violated if he tosses the ball, runs and touches it before it hits the floor. The toss is considered the start of a dribble.

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by MiamiWadeCounty

Can you tell me why it should be an illegal dribble and not traveling? You said by rule, but which rule?

4-44-1. With one exception, you have to be holding the ball to travel.

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

It violated rule 4-44-3a. The pivot foot may be lifted, but not returned to the floor, before the ball is released on a pass or try for goal.

That rule simply does not apply to the original post.

This rule covers a player who jumps and returns to the floor before he releases the ball.

The original play had the player throwing the ball, running and touching the ball before it hit the floor. That's a completely different scenario.

[MiamiWadeCounty]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

I have no idea what that means.

Yea I know. I posted that on impulse.

[APG]

Originally Posted by MiamiWadeCounty

The player has violated even if he never moved his pivot foot?

No, we've already established that that scenario is legal...a stationary player to toss and catch the ball without moving the pivot foot.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

jar gave you the appropriate case play but the case play is wrong. By rule, it's an illegal dribble. Traveling is moving the pivot foot outside prescribed limits while HOLDING the ball. A1 isn't holding the ball when he lifts his pivot.

The correct ruling was listed for years. Then, a few seasons ago, some Einstein changed the ruling.

Very true, and hopefully now that she has moved on from the NFHS, we can get this silly change reversed and have it once again deemed an illegal dribble.