Ball comes in contact with both hands while dribbling

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Rob1968

It becomes a violation only if the ball bounces up and is touched by the hand or hands of the ballhandler. If the ballhandler is not first to touch the ball, after pushing it to the floor, the action is the same as a bounce pass.

This is debatable. Some agree with you. But from where I sit, this is not true. Read the definition of a dribble. The ball is pushed to the floor once or several times. A subsequent touch is not necessary to meet this definition.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by just another ref

This is debatable. Some agree with you. But from where I sit, this is not true. Read the definition of a dribble. The ball is pushed to the floor once or several times. A subsequent touch is not necessary to meet this definition.

Agree. It is just by convention that officials often wait until it is touched again in order to resolve the ambiguity of whether the action is a dribble or a bounce pass.

[Rob1968]

I'm missing the ambiguity - if it is immediately a violation, to have stopped a dribble, and then push the ball to the floor - then every bounce pass, after a dribble has ended, would have to be a violation.
Example: A1 in frontcourt, dribbles to the top of the key, stops and stops his dribble. As A2 comes from the wing past A1, A1 pushes the ball to the floor as a pass to A2 - but the official blows his whistle . . . OOOPS - and the coach goes nuts, and all 10 players rightfully are confused (they've practiced that play 100's of times.)
To "start a dribble" is not the same thing as "a dribble" . . .

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Rob1968

I'm missing the ambiguity - if it is immediately a violation, to have stopped a dribble, and then push the ball to the floor - then every bounce pass, after a dribble has ended, would have to be a violation.
Example: A1 in frontcourt, dribbles to the top of the key, stops and stops his dribble. As A2 comes from the wing past A1, A1 pushes the ball to the floor as a pass to A2 - but the official blows his whistle . . . OOOPS - and the coach goes nuts, and all 10 players rightfully are confused (they've practiced that play 100's of times.)
To "start a dribble" is not the same thing as "a dribble" . . .

It's a judgment call. The majority of the time, a pass and the start of a dribble don't really look much alike.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Rob1968

I'm missing the ambiguity - if it is immediately a violation, to have stopped a dribble, and then push the ball to the floor - then every bounce pass, after a dribble has ended, would have to be a violation.
Example: A1 in frontcourt, dribbles to the top of the key, stops and stops his dribble. As A2 comes from the wing past A1, A1 pushes the ball to the floor as a pass to A2 - but the official blows his whistle . . . OOOPS - and the coach goes nuts, and all 10 players rightfully are confused (they've practiced that play 100's of times.)
To "start a dribble" is not the same thing as "a dribble" . . .

Yes, you're missing it the point. When it IS a dribble, it is so the moment it leaves the hand. When it IS a pass, it is so the moment it leaves the hand. It is just that it is sometimes impossible to tell and we must wait to see what happens to tell what it is.

[Rob1968]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Yes, you're missing it the point. When it IS a dribble, it is so the moment it leaves the hand. When it IS a pass, it is so the moment it leaves the hand. It is just that it is sometimes impossible to tell and we must wait to see what happens to tell what it is.

And I see it, it's ALWAYS impossible to tell, and we must wait to see what happens to tell what it is.
Example: A1 ends his dribble, obviously passes the ball towards A2 by pushing the ball to the floor (bounce pass) - ah, but A2 has not paid attention, and has gone the other direction, and A1 sees that the ball is in jeopardy of being stolen, so he hustles to it and is first to touch the ball. It's either a dbl dribble or travel violation - even tho' the "pushing the ball to the floor" was definitely intended to be a pass.
The difficulty comes from taking 4-15-3 as a complete statement, when it only deals with "starting" a dribble, and for a dribble to be executed, it must include the "end" of a dribble, as described in 4-15-4.
For my own understanding, I think of the fact that every year many people start to swim across the English channel, but only those who reach the other side have actually ended the swim, have actually done it.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Rob1968

And I see it, it's ALWAYS impossible to tell, and we must wait to see what happens to tell what it is.
Example: A1 ends his dribble, obviously passes the ball towards A2 by pushing the ball to the floor (bounce pass) - ah, but A2 has not paid attention, and has gone the other direction, and A1 sees that the ball is in jeopardy of being stolen, so he hustles to it and is first to touch the ball. It's either a dbl dribble or travel violation - even tho' the "pushing the ball to the floor" was definitely intended to be a pass.
The difficulty comes from taking 4-15-3 as a complete statement, when it only deals with "starting" a dribble, and for a dribble to be executed, it must include the "end" of a dribble, as described in 4-15-4.
For my own understanding, I think of the fact that every year many people start to swim across the English channel, but only those who reach the other side have actually ended the swim, have actually done it.

So do you think that an official must wait until a player not only starts a new dribble, but ends it as well, to penalize the action as an illegal dribble violation?
That won't be accepted.

[Rob1968]

That is my understanding. I can't, presently, view a dbl dribble call as having much to do with judgement - it is or is not. Is it possible to describe a play that may/may not be called a dbl dribblle violation, based on judgement?
I'm reminded of the old idea that an attempt at goal - shot - had to be defined by whether it hit the goal or not, in order for the shooter to be able to rebound the miss - that goes way back. With the current definitions of when a shot starts, and when it ends, now, a genuine attempt at goal, in the judgement of the official, allows the shooter to rebound a miss, whether or not it hits the goal. (A distinct situation, but the logic has some relevance.)