Ball comes in contact with both hands while dribbling

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

You don't have to read a player's mind here because the case play editor does it for you. He's attempting "to continue the dibble". Without that reference, he could be starting a bounce pass.

In my play it was a given also.

"puts the ball on the floor and tries to drive baseline"

Yet you and Adam refuse to call the violation because the dribble was not validated by a subsequent touch. This is not supported by rule.

If a ball handler, who has already dribbled once, and then holds the ball, tells me, "Hey Mr. BillyMac, I'm going to start another dribble when I push the ball to the floor", then I will call him for an illegal dribble violation when the ball leaves his hand.

This is wrong, too. You don't call it intentional when the coach yells for the player to foul. The play must be judged on its own merit.

Let's change it up a little: As dribbler A1 attempts to change directions to avoid
guard B1, he/she allows the ball to come to rest in one hand in bringing the ball
from the right to the left side of the body. A1 pushes the ball to the floor in an
attempt to make a bounce pass to A2. RULING: When A1 palmed/carried the ball, the
dribble ended and when he/she pushed the ball to the floor he attempted a legal
bounce pass.(9-5-Note: Play On)

If you judged it to be a pass attempt, yes, play on. 9-5 has no note.

Or, even better: As dribbler A1 attempts to change directions to avoid
guard B1, he/she allows the ball to come to rest in one hand in bringing the ball
from the right to the left side of the body. A1 pushes the ball to the floor in an
attempt to do something that only God, and the player, know. RULING: When A1
palmed/carried the ball, the dribble ended and when he/she pushed the ball to
the floor nobody, except God, and the player, knows what to call, so, unless God
is your partner, then play on.

Pretty thin, Billy. Do you ask God whether to award two shots when you are uncertain of a player's intent on a potential try?

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Do you ask God whether to award two shots when you are uncertain of a player's intent on a potential try?

If it looks like a try, swims like a try, and quacks like a try, then it probably is a try.



(During last week's heat wave here in Connecticut, I was forced to dunk my two pet hens, Betty, and Veronica, in a bucket of cool water twice a day to cool them off. They never really seemed to enjoy it.)

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by just another ref

... refuse to call the violation because the dribble was not validated by a subsequent touch. This is not supported by rule.

We agree here. My interpretation is not supported by rule. Sometimes we have to deviate slightly from the written rule and do what we do best, interpret. If this wasn't the case, there would be no need for a Basketball Forum. Everything would be as simple as black, and white, and there would be no need to have these great debates. Even if there was a Basketball Forum, it would be a pretty boring forum, and probably go out of business, and then where would Mark Padgett practice his stand up material?