Momentum OB
 

Off-season rant from the coach in me ... Coaching my kid's championship game in Saturday rec league (middle school division).

Question about a momentum-OB call early in the game. From division line, we inbounded deep to the back court (no press rule) and one of the kids had to dash back extra hard, took a couple of dribbles, momentum carried him OB off the endline and he returned (feet inbounds) to resume dribble of bouncing ball.

Inexperienced ref at trail tweeted, raised his hand, pointed to the endline, then made some feeble travel motion as well. I shouted something to the effect of, "He can do that!" and then the condescension came from the other, more experienced ref who had moved up as the new trail: "We have our whistles for a reason coach. Let us do our job. Someone else has to touch it first."

I don't like pulling the "I'm patched, too" card so I didn't and tried (calmly and to just the vet) explaining that someone else did not have to touch it, momentum, etc. He held his ground (also quietly and calmly) even after I tried to explain a bit more and then told him I was patched, too. I eventually ended with, "We're going to have to agree to disagree on this one" and left it at that, on respectful terms.

We wound up being flat and getting waxed after a couple playing a couple of great games earlier, so no big deal. But I wanted to confirm I was right: The vet is a good ref but I think he was wrong on this one (not sure if he knew -- didn't sound like it -- or just wasn't throwing partner under the bus).

Or was I wrong? Looking under 7.1 really only addresses tipping a ball and then coming back on the court to gain possession. I thought if momentum takes you off, even after starting a dribble, you can come back and resume, as long as you're on the court and didn't stop the dribble. Am I kicking it?

This is going to be one of two things, either an OOB violation if the dribbler was deemed to still be in control or an interrupted dribble and if that is the case, then it is nothing as long as your player had in bounds status when he touched the ball.

It's hard to tell from not seeing it and your description but it sound like it was an interrupted dribble to me.

Let's just say this wouldn't be the first vet I've seen get this rule wrong; and it's usually impossible to get through to them.

I've had them make the "first to touch" call. I've had them make the call and claim the player needed to get both feet down in bounds before he could touch it.

Yep, It Happens, Sadly
 

Sadly, things can be incorrect in the most uncharacteristic places. Viewed a girls hs regional game last week where the seemingly veteran official called a "travel" on a girl on a sideline OB play :(, then compounded his error by saying, right in front of the bench, "You can't move your feet during an in-bounds..." :mad:
Didn't affect the outcome of the game, but one can only be gratified it didn't get called with the game tied and five seconds to go...

Amesman - I think you were OK in your discussion with the ref as long as you didn't bite his ear (see other posts). :p

If the inbounds pass to A2 was never under A2's control before A2 went OB, then there should not have been a 10-second count started, and A2 going establishing possession inbounds, after being OB, is legal.

If the dribbles as bolded above were deemed to have been in A2's control, then a 10-second count should have been started, and A2 may not go OB, let alone back inbounds.

If the dribbles as bolded above were deemed to have been in A2's control, and then no longer in A2's control, and therefore, an interrupted dribble, then a 10-second count should have been started, continued, and A2 MAY go OB, and back inbounds to gather the ball for continued play.

It all comes down to a judgement call by the covering official.

All true, but none of this justifies the statement that someone else needed to be the first to touch the ball.

OB to me. Whats the difference if he was dribbling up sideline and did the same thing? As I believe snaqs said, if no control, a no call

Agreed, if a dribbler steps OOB, then it doesn't matter whether he's the first to touch the ball or not, it's OOB. It's the first to touch implication that drives me crazy.

I agree that the T's quote is incorrect, but a violation may have been the correct call, just for the wrong reason.

An interesting follow-up, is would a L confer with the T to see if the call should be ruled as an IW. :eek: If it's a newbie as T, I might consider it.

Confer? Help? Dont get em started :D

Good points, all. Thanks.

In my estimation, my young guy raced to track down the ball that was heading OB, took a few dribbles (in control) yet couldn't stop his body from going OB so left the ball to do its thing while his body continued OB, stopped and came back to continue dribbling the ball -- never touching ball and OB simultaneously. There was no catching of it or turning it over with the palm, either, which was pretty skillful for this age.

I would have judged he had control with the two dribbles, just couldn't help himself from going OB. Not sure where that leaves it with JAR's last two possibilities (he had control of the ball, then didn't ...). Recognize the likely HTBT factor ...

If you judge he had control of the dribble, then the second that he steps OB, whether by misjudgement of where the playing boundaries are, or by momentum, or other reason, it is a violation. That his hand wasn't at the time in contact with the ball is irrelevant.

The T shouldn't have said that someone else has to touch the ball.

This sounds like an interrupted dribble.

This does not.

HTBT I guess.

In the OP, my first thought is that it wasn't a dribble. It seems unlikely that the kid sprinted back and gained control but was unable to control himself enough to stay inbounds.

Sure it does, his momentum would either have him travelling by grabbing ball and taking steps or as he decided to do......dribble. He then says whoa I can't dribble OOB, so I'll leave ball here only to return when he has control of himself

I can't believe there is even a discussion on what this is. Any other situation at any other area on the court and you have an easy travel(edit......OOB)

Think of dribbler on a fast break who leaves ball near basket as he can't stop only to run OOB, return to court grab ball and lay it in.......huh?

What it seems a few are saying is there are no court boundaries:eek:

In the OP it does not sound as though the play met the first criterion for an ID since the ball didn't deflect off the dribbler. IMO it doesn't meet the second criterion either. The ball really didn't "get away" from the dribbler. It sounds more like the dribbler got away from the ball. WIthout seeing the play I'd say OOB was the correct call but as others said just not for the reason given.

Nothing says an interrupted dribble has to be involuntary. As a rule of thumb, I use two bounces. If the ball bounces twice between touches, I generally consider it interrupted.

Rule Of Thumb ...
 

Good rule of thumb. Speaking of a rule of thumb, I had a retired official tell me last night that if, "the thumb goes up", that it's a carry (palming) violation. Any thoughts?

Sounds like it deserves its own thread.

Fullor, how would you get a travel out of this? In the middle of the court this would be nothing.

Nice Hijack, BM
 

"Any more than a handshake" around here.

not following your question. OP sitch is about OOB.

I think we've recently had this discussion recently, but I do have to respectfully disagree. The definition of an interrupted dribble uses the terms "deflect" and "gets away" neither of which are voluntary actions of a dribbler. If a dribbler does something intentional with the ball he is controlling it and it is under his control.

However, I admit this makes the op a difficult case. As written this is an OOB violation. However, if instead of A1 recovering the ball, A2 recovers the ball, it would be a pass and not a dribble and therefore not a violation. That's a problem.

But likewise, the ability to interrupt a dribble at will causes problems (like allowing the dribbler to go OOB whenever he pleases so long as he convinces the referee that he's interrupted his dribble).

I was responding to the following...

How would you have a travel?

OOPS, You wouldn't, meant to say OOB.

OK that makes much more sense.

I see your point, but I I think "whenever he pleases" is a stretch. If he goes out on purpose, it's a violation for that. In my view, if he relinquishes control, he's giving the defense an opportunity to grab the ball.

Stretching for illustrations purposes only of course. :)

However, do when then need to determine whether he meant to go out or not? And then would we have to wait to see how many times the ball bounced if we determine he didn't mean to go out?

I'm sympathetic to what your saying because I agree that it feels fair. I think it's a rough spot in the rules but one I don't think I've ever personally encountered in a real game.

I saw it during a scrimmage in my first year. The dribbler lost her balance and was falling out of bounds, she let the ball go and went OOB. The ball kept bouncing and nobody went for it so she ran back in and grabbbed it. The official had no whistle on it and it sparked a lively conversation between all of us with our trainer confirming it was the right call.

Let go.... so she was not dribbling, but rather holding the ball when she lost her balance?

"The dribbler..."

She let it bounce off on its own and did not attempt to control it any longer when she realized she could not maintain her inbounds status.

Good example in first few minutes of BYU Marquette of this thread. Marquette defender swipes ball away from A1, pushes ball up court (once), as he steps tightwalks sideline............steps OOB. Tweet, OOB

Obviously the official who made the call considered him to be dribbling.

In the OP the player gave up the dribble.

2 different plays...

wrong

+1

We have to determine that anyway. We normally give the benefit of the doubt to momentum.

I've had the call once in a JV boys game. A1 trapped near the sideline about the FT line extended in his FC. Still has his dribble, but can't go anywhere. He throws it over the head of B1, towards the division line, then runs around the trap, out of bounds, to get the ball.

He wasn't in control of his dribble, but he went out for an unauthorized reason, so I blew it. Of course, it was opposite table, so the coaches likely had no idea what I called and no one questioned it.

I've also had the sideline play. A1 dribbling up court, comes up on B1 close to the sideline. He pushes his dribble slightly towards the middle of the court while he tiptoes along the sideline. Ball goes on one side of B1, A1 goes to the other. He gets around, stepping on the line in the process, comes back in and tracks the ball down to resume his dribble. No call.

Just a wrong huh? No rules ref or caseplays? As if you are a rules interpreter of an association. :eek:
HaHaHa!!

See, this is the play I'm talking about when I say it's problematic to allow a dribbler to interrupt his dribble intentionally. This is not an interrupted dribble in my mind because the dribbler is controlling the ball. It's not gotten away from him and it's certainly not deflected off him. This play should, IMO, be a violation. I understand why you wouldn't call it though.

I understand your point. I think it's sufficient to relinquish control, as the defense had plenty of opportunity to get the ball. His ID could have easily been a pass as well, but he certainly wasn't in player control, and I certainly wouldn't have granted a TO request during that time.

Sorry - my bad. That was not what I meant to say. My internet conked out and I thought that my edit went through.

Sorry, bad choice of words, I was rushed on a biz thing and just posted that, rather than to say I disagree.

All I'm saying is in both OP and Ohio game I saw both respective players started dribbles and ran OOB. Maybe we are discussing two different things.