Fumble or shot attempt? (Video)

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by twocentsworth

it WOULD have been a travel IF he re-gained possession of the ball…he never did - there is no foul on the defender. The official called a travel prematurely…probably because it "looked funny" - which a lot of officials do….

A player can always recover a fumble. Even when loses control going up for shot. In this case had he come down with the ball he would have been able to start a dribble since he had not done so before. Exact play is in ncaa case book. Rules are same nfhs. My two cents

AR 74--ncaa

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by BigCat

A player can always recover a fumble. Even when loses control going up for shot. In this case had he come down with the ball he would have been able to start a dribble since he had not done so before. Exact play is in ncaa case book. Rules are same nfhs. My two cents

AR 74--ncaa

You are correct for NCAA, but wrong for NFHS. The NFHS ruling is in the "past interps" thread on this forum.


SUPPLEMENT #1 (11/9/00)
SITUATION 1: A1 is an airborne shooter preparing to release the ball on a shot attempt. Instead of releasing the ball on the try, A1 fumbles the ball (while still in the air) and drops it. A1 then returns to the floor and secures possession of the ball. RULING: Traveling violation. While airborne the bail must be released for a try or pass. (4-43-3a; 9-4)

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

You are correct for NCAA, but wrong for NFHS. The NFHS ruling is in the "past interps" thread on this forum.

Which part are you saying is wrong and do you have any idea what year of those you are talking about? You can always recover a fumble so I'd like to see the wording of the play. Thx

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by BigCat

Which part are you saying is wrong and do you have any idea what year of those you are talking about? You can always recover a fumble so I'd like to see the wording of the play. Thx

Just posted it for you.

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Just posted it for you.

Thx. I guess what I believe is that this old play from the interps deals with situation where I fumble going up, regain control while in the air, intentionally drop it and then grab it on ground. When I am the first to touch it on the ground it is said that the act of dropping it was a start of dribble. Started dribble without pivot foot on floor. Travel. The explanation in your play says that while airborne, player has to release it on a try or pass. He has to have control for that which is why I believe when they add the term "drop" to your play they consider that regaining control. If you look at other plays in rule,4 you will see they also use term "drop" to mean an intentional act as opposed to a fumble.

Also, the travel rules for NFHS are understood to be same as ncaa. I believe when you fumble the ball you can recover it always. What you can do after you recover it depends...let me know what u think. Thx

Why do old interpretations matter? I can't point to them in the rule/case book, so why should I be explaining to a coach that according to some interp from x years ago his team running around the opponents side of the court during warmups is a technical foul?? Can someone explain why I should care/know about old interps?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by AremRed

Why do old interpretations matter? I can't point to them in the rule/case book, so why should I be explaining to a coach that according to some interp from x years ago his team running around the opponents side of the court during warmups is a technical foul?? Can someone explain why I should care/know about old interps?

I agree with your logic completely. It is really hard to tell someone you know what you are doing when you cannot prove it to anyone, unless you see it in a very special place. Not everyone is going to come to this site to know what to do. And if you started officiating well after an interpretation, then you are at a big disadvantage. I have been saying what you have been saying for years. If the interpretations still applies, it should be in the casebook still. Otherwise we are just using a certain kind of knowledge as law in these kinds of cases.

Peace

[OKREF]

No foul, no travel. It's a fumble. I'm thinking I would allow him to recover the fumble.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by BigCat

Thx. I guess what I believe is that this old play from the interps deals with situation where I fumble going up, regain control while in the air, intentionally drop it and then grab it on ground. When I am the first to touch it on the ground it is said that the act of dropping it was a start of dribble. Started dribble without pivot foot on floor. Travel. The explanation in your play says that while airborne, player has to release it on a try or pass. He has to have control for that which is why I believe when they add the term "drop" to your play they consider that regaining control. If you look at other plays in rule,4 you will see they also use term "drop" to mean an intentional act as opposed to a fumble.

Also, the travel rules for NFHS are understood to be same as ncaa. I believe when you fumble the ball you can recover it always. What you can do after you recover it depends...let me know what u think. Thx

No, the play ruling is simply for a player with the ball who jumps into the air and does not either pass or try for goal, yet returns to the floor with the ball. That is traveling per NFHS rules. There is no exception for loss of player control due to a fumble in this situation as there is under NCAA rules.

This principle has been around for a long, long time under NFHS rules. I debated this very play with the late Jurassic Referee several years ago and he was proven correct when Bob Jenkins was able to provide the old interpretation to support Jurassic Referee's reading of the the NFHS traveling rule 4-44-3b.

We just have to accept that the NFHS ruling is different from that of the NCAA for this specific situation.