Fumble or shot attempt? (Video)

[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

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

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

i agree. i don't think the explanation in that 2000 interp really explains anything either. the travel rule on jumping just says ball has to be released on a try or pass. case book plays tell us what can be done and not done after ball is released.

i can understand why you might want that to be the rule---player fumbled going up to pass or shoot, he made mistake. say he can't touch it first. put it in the case book. what's in the case book is the play where dribbler ends his dribble, fumbles and is allowed to go get it. language says he can always retrieve fumble. why allow that and not allow shooter or passer to retrieve his fumble…
and why put one in case book and not the other…..sorry I'm rambling...

[Kansas Ref]

Ambiguity reigns, but I've got "nothing".

I could not tell what violation our ref had in the video--could not see his mechanic--was it clear to anyone else on our forum?

[Altor]

Originally Posted by Kansas Ref

I could not tell what violation our ref had in the video--could not see his mechanic--was it clear to anyone else on our forum?

It sure looked like the end of an illegal dribble signal to me.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by BigCat

i can understand why you might want that to be the rule---player fumbled going up to pass or shoot, he made mistake. say he can't touch it first. put it in the case book. what's in the case book is the play where dribbler ends his dribble, fumbles and is allowed to go get it. language says he can always retrieve fumble. why allow that and not allow shooter or passer to retrieve his fumble…
and why put one in case book and not the other…..sorry I'm rambling...

The NFHS may change the rule to match the NCAA at some point in the future, but that hasn't happened yet.

The reason that there is a difference between this ruling and the dribble one in the NFHS Case Book is that the dribbling player has not yet lifted his pivot foot into the air. As you can read for yourself in 4-44, once a player picks up his pivot, the ball must be passed or shot. If not, by rule, a traveling violation has occurred.

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

The NFHS may change the rule to match the NCAA at some point in the future, but that hasn't happened yet.

The reason that there is a difference between this ruling and the dribble one in the NFHS Case Book is that the dribbling player has not yet lifted his pivot foot into the air. As you can read for yourself in 4-44, once a player picks up his pivot, the ball must be passed or shot. If not, by rule, a traveling violation has occurred.

The fumble /dribble play I am Talking about is 4.15.4. The player has dribbled. He ends the dribble and in doing so also fumbles ball several feet away. He is allowed to run and recover it. Nothing in that play about foot in air....

[BigCat]

I think I see what u r saying

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

The NFHS may change the rule to match the NCAA at some point in the future, but that hasn't happened yet.

The reason that there is a difference between this ruling and the dribble one in the NFHS Case Book is that the dribbling player has not yet lifted his pivot foot into the air. As you can read for yourself in 4-44, once a player picks up his pivot, the ball must be passed or shot. If not, by rule, a traveling violation has occurred.

Based on this interpretation, the player should not be allowed to request a timeout to avoid the requirements.

[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.