someone please agree with me on this one. When a player is accepting a pass and they catch the pass by stopping the ball with their hand and catching the ball after it has fallen from their hand to the floor and bounced back up. I know you folks see it all the time. They have used their dribble correct?? If they put the ball on the floor again it is double dribble right?? Or is their exceptions to this??

A dribble is a controlled act. If they knock the ball down with their hand, then catch it to gain control, they have not yet dribbled. If they bounce in (as opposed to knocking it down), they have dribbled. They pay you all that money to determine which happened.

A dribble is a controlled act. If they knock the ball down with their hand, then catch it to gain control, they have not yet dribbled. If they bounce it (as opposed to knocking it down), they have dribbled. They pay you all that money to determine which happened.

Was it controlled?
 

Rocky,
I agree with you, but no fans will.:)
mick

This was brought up by a coach at our last years NCAA meeting of officials in KC. Our supervisor stated the player must catch to ball for control. We will not try to decide if it is a controled dribble.

Easy enough
 

Bart,
I can live with that.
mick

I would go further by saying that to bounce once or twice it is not controlled. To continue to bounce the ball it becomes a dribble by the fact that the player is in control. In a JH game, this rule of thumb can be thrown out the window. These kids can take all the bounces they need to gain control, catch the ball, then begin their dribble.

I agree, Bart. We DO see this happen often in a game, and the key is whether the player controlled the ball enough to be actually starting a dribble when it goes to the floor. Since few, if any, players intentionally push the ball to the floor off a pass and then grab it (thus, giving up their dribble after one bounce), I'd say they simply did not gain control of the ball until they grabbed it AFTER it bounced to the floor. Usually it's easy to see that it simply bounced off the player's hand(s) and fell to the floor. Let 'em begin a dribble, then listen for all the yells from coaches and fans who don't understand the rule. What's worse, though, is the occasional partner who will call a double-dribble when the player was in my primary, not trusting me enough to get it right.

We could open a whole can of worms when it comes to calling out of your primary. I believe its 90%+ the calls are wrong when i see my partners call in my area. The other 9 or 10% is my partner has a faster whistle then me. Please don't misunderstand, i'm not saying i work with bad officials. On the contrary i work with some great officials. It doesn't matter how good you are, you just don't have as good a look as the official on the spot. With few exceptions-of course.

Rocky,

I don't call a double dribble in this situation. I don't think the rules support it. I think it can best be described as a muff or perhaps a fumble, although the ball probably hasn't been controlled yet. Remember that you can fumble, dribble, fumble but you can't dribble, fumble, dribble. I would treat this as a fumble, even though by definition, that may not be absolutely correct. But no matter, no player control has been established.

This would be what most would call a game interrupter.

Tony

case when control is established
 

Generally speaking, this play is not a double dribble. However, a player may be closely guarded and may end up deflecting the ball in such a manner to keep the ball away from a defender. That would then constitute a dribble since control is definitely established. Not to consider it a dribble would constitute taking away a good defensive play.

David

Re: case when control is established
 

except, David, that "A player is not dribbling ... when he/she bats ... a pass away from other players who are attempting to get it." (Fed 4-15-4, Note 2) NCAA has a similar rule.

A good point Bob - however, I think that this Question (under 4-15) covers the situation when the ball is being batted away from the player. I would agree that the player is not in control in this situation.

The situation that I am talking about occurs when the player has DELIBERATELY (ie. under control) directed the ball towards themselves to avoid the defence. I would consider that the start of the dribble since the player had sufficient control over the ball to direct towards themselves. As in 4-15-3 "The dribble may be started by pushing, throwing or batting the ball to the floor." The key point is whether or not the official feels that the player had control over the bat. If somone has sufficient control to bat towards themselves, keeping the ball away from the defense, then I would refer to this as the start of the dribble.

In such a case, I need a clear-cut case of control to determine this. If the defence makes a good play and forces the offence to use up their dribble, I support this.

David