What a way to start the season!

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Got any citations for the "roll" part of your statement? I know that he can't roll over after he stops sliding, but how about some rule, or casebook play, that states he can roll due to momentum.

Yep...right in the case quoted...

Originally Posted by BillyMac

The casebook only talks about sliding.

4.44.5 situation b: A1 dives for a loose ball and slides after gaining control. A1 is in a position either on his/her back or stomach. What can a1 do without violating? Ruling: A1 may pass, shoot, start a dribble or call a time-out. Once a1 has the ball and is no longer sliding, he/she may not roll over. If flat on his/her back, a1 may sit up without violating. Any attempt to get to the feet is traveling unless a1 is dribbling. It is also traveling if a1 puts the ball on the floor, then rises and is first to touch the ball. (4-44-5b).

I'm not sure myself, so I would like some verification.

It says that they can not roll over once they stop sliding....implying they can roll over before that. Otherwise, they wouldn't have qualified the restriction on rolling to apply to the time after they stop sliding.

Also, the case mentions a player diving and ending up on their back or stomach. I have never seen a person dive for something and end up on their back without rolling over to some degree.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

... implying they can roll over before that.

You're probably right, but I still have a problem with relying on an implication as part of your citation.

Also, regarding the rollover after sliding, we've been told (no citations, sorry) for over thirty years that this had nothing to do with momentum, but rather, with gaining an advantage not afforded by the rules by rolling over and trying to keep the ball away from defenders.

I have had no problem holding my whistle for a sliding player, but, to be honest, I would be hard pressed not to sound my whistle for a rolling player, especially since the casebook play (the only citation that I can find for this situation) specifies sliding, not rolling.

If I allow rolling in a big play, at the end of the game, at the end of the season, with playoff implications, I would have a hard time defending myself to a coach, athletic director, my partner, or my assigner, with a caseplay book in their hands.

Maybe someone can come up with an old caseplay, and settle this, probably in your favor.

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

You're probably right, but I still have a problem with relying on an implication as part of your citation.

Also, regarding the rollover after sliding, we've been told (no citations, sorry) for over thirty years that this had nothing to do with momentum, but rather, with gaining an advantage not afforded by the rules by rolling over and trying to keep the ball away from defenders.

I have had no problem holding my whistle for a sliding player, but, to be honest, I would be hard pressed not to sound my whistle for a rolling player, especially since the casebook play (the only citation that I can find for this situation) specifies sliding, not rolling.

If I allow rolling in a big play, at the end of the game, at the end of the season, with playoff implications, I would have a hard time defending myself to a coach, athletic director, my partner, or my assigner, with a caseplay book in their hands.

Maybe someone can come up with an old caseplay, and settle this, probably in your favor.

Yes, I cant go as far as to say because drafters say you can't do it when the slide ends you can do it before. Argument could be made, which Billy is making, that this case play says "slide" and that's what it addresses. Literal interpretation.

Could also say drafters knew about rolling cause addressed it After momentum stopped. If they wanted player be able to roll during momentum they could have said so. Like they do in NCAA. I couldn't cite this case play to support allowing rolling in a high school game. Imo

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Yep...right in the case quoted...


It says that they can not roll over once they stop sliding....implying they can roll over before that. Otherwise, they wouldn't have qualified the restriction on rolling to apply to the time after they stop sliding.

Also, the case mentions a player diving and ending up on their back or stomach. I have never seen a person dive for something and end up on their back without rolling over to some degree.

After further review I don't think rolling due to momentum is involved in any way in this play because the play tells us to assume A1 has the ball and is SLIDING.
Then asks "what can he do without violating?" The entire assumption involved is that the player is holding the ball sliding on his back or stomach. What can he do?

Answer: shoot, pass, dribble timeout. It then says in a sort of "by the way fashion". When stopped sliding he can sit up but not roll. They are just telling us what A1 can and can't do once he stops SLIDING. I don't feel by that statement they are saying/implying he can roll over while sliding. (It is not one of the four things mentioned) thx

I also don't think it rules out the roll caused by momentum. It just isn't addressed because the whole play assumes only a slide. Thx

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by BigCat

After further review I don't think rolling due to momentum is involved in any way in this play because the play tells us to assume A1 has the ball and is SLIDING.
Then asks "what can he do without violating?" The entire assumption involved is that the player is holding the ball sliding on his back or stomach. What can he do?

Answer: shoot, pass, dribble timeout. It then says in a sort of "by the way fashion". When stopped sliding he can sit up but not roll. They are just telling us what A1 can and can't do once he stops SLIDING. I don't feel by that statement they are saying/implying he can roll over while sliding. (It is not one of the four things mentioned) thx

I also don't think it rules out the roll caused by momentum. It just isn't addressed because the whole play assumes only a slide. Thx

This is a case play, not a rule. Read it for concepts. They're telling us they want players to go after a loose ball. Again, the qualification about what they can do after they stop sliding IS indirectly a statement on what then can do before they stop sliding. They're drawing a distinction between the TYPES of things allowed due to the momentum of the dive and deliberate movement that is not part of the dive.

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

This is a case play, not a rule. Read it for concepts. They're telling us they want players to go after a loose ball. Again, the qualification about what they can do after they stop sliding IS indirectly a statement on what then can do before they stop sliding. They're drawing a distinction between the TYPES of things allowed due to the momentum of the dive and deliberate movement that is not part of the dive.

Thx for the reply Cameron. I get the concepts, encourage hustle, we allow player to slide should also allow rolls that are due to momentum. College play spells it out clearly. I agree with it and think it's better case play interpretation rule etc.

I just disagree that this play makes it clear under NFHS and that because it says you can't roll once stop sliding you can infer player could before he stopped. For reasons stated earlier. Thx again for replying.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

... indirectly a statement...

Thats the problem for me, I would prefer a direct statement.

The rule states nothing. The casebook only talks about a slide.

Camron Rust may be right, but it's not due to the citations quoted. I need more information before I will allow a player possessing a ball to roll around on the floor after chasing down a loose ball. I may even let him slide and roll simultaneously, but I can't allow him to just roll.

The casebook play tells me me to allow him to slide, but anything else is simply conjecture at this point.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Thats the problem for me, I would prefer a direct statement.

The rule states nothing. The casebook only talks about a slide.

Camron Rust may be right, but it's not due to the citations quoted. I need more information before I will allow a player possessing a ball to roll around on the floor after chasing down a loose ball. I may even let him slide and roll simultaneously, but I can't allow him to just roll.

The casebook play tells me me to allow him to slide, but anything else is simply conjecture at this point.

It would be cost prohibitive to print and distribute a 4,879 page rule book and 5,192 page casebook.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

I started this thread to let everybody know that what was supposed to be an easy start to the season turned into a game report for an disqualified and ejected coach. While everybody here knows how much I love to debate rules and interpretations this was supposed to be a light hearted humorous thread.

MTD, Sr.

[Coach Bill]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

I started this thread to let everybody know that what was supposed to be an easy start to the season turned into a game report for an disqualified and ejected coach. While everybody here knows how much I love to debate rules and interpretations this was supposed to be a light hearted humorous thread.

MTD, Sr.

Hey, you're the one that started it out by saying an 8th grader generated enough momentum to be sliding AND rolling 10-12 feet.

Like you said, he probably dove, grabbed the ball and slid on his back for 6-8 feet and passed the ball. No Travel. Good call.

Just didn't come across that way.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

I started this thread.

"Don't shoot the messenger" is not the same as, "Shoot the controversial thread starter".

(Note: Excellent thread. Thanks Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.)

[Kansas Ref]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

I started this thread to let everybody know that what was supposed to be an easy start to the season turned into a game report for an disqualified and ejected coach. While everybody here knows how much I love to debate rules and interpretations this was supposed to be a light hearted humorous thread.

MTD, Sr.

*ha ha MTD: just goes to show that unintended outcomes often result from the most simple of issues. Keep on posting tho, we luv it.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

It would be cost prohibitive to print and distribute a 4,879 page rule book and 5,192 page casebook.

How about one of those annual interpretations, à la Nevadaref?

[Camron Rust]

Just saw a reference to an old post where the question of momentum/sliding/rolling was addressed. The question was posed to the NFHS and Mary Struckoff provided the following answer:

PLAY: A1 dives to the floor and secures control of the ball. A1's momentum causes him/her to roll over while sliding on the floor. Official rules this a traveling violation. Is the official correct? (Is rolling always a violation, or only after momentum has stopped?)

Rolling is allowed IF it were caused by momentum. Traveling cannot be called until momentum had ended. Once momentum stops, then a player that “rolls” away from a defender would be guilty of traveling.

(Reference: https://forum.officiating.com/507253-post68.html)

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

The question was posed to the NFHS and Mary Struckoff provided the following answer: Rolling is allowed IF it were caused by momentum.

Great citation Camron Rust. Thanks. Hopefully we can remember this the next time we have a debate/discussion/argument about rolling. It will save us a lot of time.