"Shooter Changes His Mind" Travel (Video)

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by just another ref

... If a player pushes/drops/throws the ball straight to the floor and there is no teammate there to retrieve the ball immediately, this is not a pass or a try. If it was not a fumble, then by default it is a dribble and is accompanied by the resulting consequences.

So, if a ball handler picks up his dribble, expecting a teammate to cut right, makes a bounce pass to the right, but the teammate cuts left instead of right, and the pass is bounced to nobody, under those conditions you can determine if it was a pass, or a dibble?

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

So, if a ball handler picks up his dribble, expecting a teammate to cut right, makes a bounce pass to the right, but the teammate cuts left instead of right, and the pass is bounced to nobody, under those conditions you can determine if it was a pass, or a dibble?

Yes

[potato]

your narration make it's easy to tell it's a pass since you used the word pass, try use "dropped" instead.

someone mention it's possible to judge intent, it is, say if a person is doing a standard shooting form that 90% players do, you can judge the move as a try, if someone drops the ball like 90% players when they starts a dribble, you can say it's a dribble even if the person didn't touch the ball after the bounce, if a person merely drops the ball on the floor like this case and you want to call it a double dribble, well you need some statistic to back up your judgement on the dribbling intent.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

So, if a ball handler picks up his dribble, expecting a teammate to cut right, makes a bounce pass to the right, but the teammate cuts left instead of right, and the pass is bounced to nobody, under those conditions you can determine if it was a pass, or a dibble?

Originally Posted by just another ref

Yes

Agree. It really isn't that hard.

[Rob1968]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Here's the deal, for those who haven't heard it before. As cited earlier by Nevada, when a dribble is illegal it occurs when the ball is pushed to the floor.

4.15.4 SITUATION A:

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 continue the dribble.

RULING: When A1 palmed/carried the ball, the dribble ended and when he/she pushed the ball to the floor a violation occurred. (9-5)


People say you can't judge intent. You can judge intent. We do it all the time on fouls. Two shots? Worst case scenario is this. A1 goes up to shoot, sees his shot will be blocked and drops the ball straight to the floor. He then assumes an aggressive stance and tries to screen the defender away from the ball while yelling to his teammate: "Hey, A2! Come get the ball. I can't touch it!" B1 then takes a swipe at the ball and knocks it out of bounds. If you didn't call the violation immediately, you give the ball back to Team A. I think this is wrong.

This debate comes up about every 4 to 6 months. It's never solved by consensus, because the NFHS has given both sides a citation that supports opposing points of view:

Case Book 9.5: A1 dribbles and comes to a stop after which he/she throws the ball against: (a) his/her own backboard; (b) the opponent's backboard; or (c) an official and catches the ball after each. RULING: Legal in (A); a team's own backboard is considered part of the team's "equipment" and may be used. In (b) and (c), A1 has violated; throwing the ball against an opponent's backboard or an official constitutes another dribble, provided A1 is first to touch the ball after it strikes the official or the board. (4-4-5; 4-15-1, 2; Fundamental 19) (italics added)

(And, Fundamental 19 dispells any argument that the ball touching the backboard is inherently different from touching the floor.)

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Rob1968

This debate comes up about every 4 to 6 months. It's never solved by consensus, because the NFHS has given both sides a citation that supports opposing points of view:

Case Book 9.5: A1 dribbles and comes to a stop after which he/she throws the ball against: (a) his/her own backboard; (b) the opponent's backboard; or (c) an official and catches the ball after each. RULING: Legal in (A); a team's own backboard is considered part of the team's "equipment" and may be used. In (b) and (c), A1 has violated; throwing the ball against an opponent's backboard or an official constitutes another dribble, provided A1 is first to touch the ball after it strikes the official or the board. (4-4-5; 4-15-1, 2; Fundamental 19) (italics added)

(And, Fundamental 19 dispells any argument that the ball touching the backboard is inherently different from touching the floor.)

In the plays above it is clear that the intent of the ballhandler was not to dribble. A pass is when the ball is directed to another player. If the thrower is first to touch, the other player is eliminated from the play, creating the violation. Throwing the ball against the opponent's backboard is a unique situation. It was either done by accident or in a misguided attempt to circumvent the rule.

In the case of the player who throws/drops the ball straight to the floor, often inches from his own foot, usually there is not another player to consider in the play. Therefore, in my opinion, it is an immediate violation.

[potato]

There's alot of ways you can see it if you really want to judge the play immediately after the player dropped the ball, in this case, he dropped the ball not in a way a player would normally start a dribble, the player might have "fumbled" and dropped the ball, by calling it double dribble instead of waiting to see how the play goes, sounds a bit unforgiving. Because players normally don't drop the ball to start a dribble, they bounce it.

[Kansas Ref]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

{sit #1 When an airborne player keeps control of an attempted shot that is blocked and is unable to release the ball and returns to the floor with it, that player has not traveled; it is a held ball. COLOR="Blue"], [/COLOR][/COLOR]in this situation, the shooter loses control of the ball because of the block, then this is simply a blocked shot and play continues. {sit#3> If, in this situation, the defender simply touches the ball, and the airborne shooter returns to the floor holding the ball, it’s a traveling violation. {sit#4> When an airborne player tries for goal, sees that the try will be blocked, purposely drops the ball, and picks up the ball after it hits the floor, that player has traveled by starting a dribble with the pivot foot off the floor.

*well stated!
I see situation #1: at least twice per game.
I see situation #2: at least 3 to 4 times per game.
I see situation#3: perhaps 1 or 2 times per season.
I have never seen situation#4, neither while officiating nor while observing a game.

[Rob1968]

Originally Posted by just another ref

In the plays above it is clear that the intent of the ballhandler was not to dribble. A pass is when the ball is directed to another player. If the thrower is first to touch, the other player is eliminated from the play, creating the violation. Throwing the ball against the opponent's backboard is a unique situation. It was either done by accident or in a misguided attempt to circumvent the rule.

In the case of the player who throws/drops the ball straight to the floor, often inches from his own foot, usually there is not another player to consider in the play. Therefore, in my opinion, it is an immediate violation.

Case Book play 9.5, to which I referred, cites Fundamental 19: "A ball which touches the front face or edges of the backboard is treated the same as touching the floor inbounds, except that when the ball touches the thrower's backboard, it does not constitute a part of a dribble." (italics added) This statement indicates that the precedence is "the ball touching the floor inbounds." Thus, any actions directly linked to "the ball touching the floor inbounds" that would constitute a legal/illegal dribble must be inherent in any actions related thereto, with exceptions as noted.

Case Book play 4.15.4 SITUATION A ignores the statement in Fundamental 19. And seems to me to be another hasty inerpretation of the dribble/illegal dribble rule.

That Case Book play is followed by 4.15.4 SITUATION C, which again uses the statement ". . . provided A1 is first to touch the ball after it strikes the official or the board." (italiccs added) This is consistent with Fundamental 19, and again leads one to believe that 4.15.4 A, is a mis-statement of the intent.

Perhaps the crux of the matter is one's understanding of the statement in 4-15-1 DRIBBLE . . . "A dribble is ball movement caused by a player in control who bats (intentionally strikes the ball with the hand(s) or pushes the ball to the floor once or several times." (italics added) and its relation to 4-15-3 which defines the start of a dribble, and 4-15-4, which defines the end of a dribble.
In one train of thought, the start of the dribble constitutes a (complete)dribble, thus the immediate ruling that such action is illegal, if/when it follows the end of a previous dribble. However, by applying the definition of the end of a dribble, one is led to understand that a dribble must have a beginning and an end, to meet the definition of a (complete) dribble, and only then can a ruling of a legal/illegal dribble be effected.
In that second train of thought, the " . . . pushing, throwing or batting (of) the ball to the floor before the pivot foot is lifted" as stated in 4-15-3 "may" be the start of a dribble, but that action can only be considered a (complete) dribble when and if the dribble is ended, as in 4-15-4. (italics added)
And that second train of thought leads one to the conclusion, as afore-stated, that when a legal dribble has ended, a subsequent ". . . pushing, throwing or batting (of) the ball to the floor, (or other surface of the playing apparatus, with exceptions noted) must be followed by ". . . the player being the first to touch the ball, thereafter" for that action to be considered a (complete) and therefore second, and thus an illegal dribble.

[BillyMac]

9.5 SITUATION: A1 dribbles and comes to a stop after which he throws the ball against ... the opponent’s backboard ... and catches the ball ... RULING: A1 has violated; throwing the ball against an opponent’s backboard ... constitutes another dribble, provided A1 is first to touch the ball after it strikes ... the board. (4-4-5; 4-15-1, 2; Fundamental 19)

Fundamental 19. A ball which touches the front face or edges of the backboard is treated the same as touching the floor inbounds, except that when the ball touches the thrower’s backboard, it does not constitute a part of a dribble.

Originally Posted by just another ref

In the plays above it is clear that the intent of the ball handler was not to dribble. A pass is when the ball is directed to another player. If the thrower is first to touch, the other player is eliminated from the play, creating the violation.

A1 ends his dribble and throws the ball against his opponent's backboard. What are we going to call this "throw(ing)" motion?

It can be a fumble, but I think that the NFHS would have told us it was unintentional if they expected us to think that it was a fumble. So, it's not a fumble.

Maybe it's a pass? But some in this thread have stated that a pass must be to somebody, and I doubt that there was somebody sitting on top of the backboard. Maybe there was somebody waiting to catch the pass after the ball deflected off the backboard, but the NFHS did not give us that information either. So, it wasn't a pass. Which is much better stated in just another ref's post above.

Maybe it was a try? But it couldn't have been a try because we at know that you can't have a try at an opponent's basket. So, it wasn't a try.

Let's see? What left? A dribble. That's left. It must have been a dribble. The NFHS even tells us that it was a dribble in the casebook play ("constitutes another dribble").

So it was a dribble, and when does the NFHS want us to call this illegal (double) dribble violation?

When the ball is released (pushed to the floor, which in this case is the backboard) by the ball handler? No.

How about when the ball hits the backboard (pushed to the floor, which in this case is the backboard)? No.

How about when the ball hits the real floor? Again, another no.

It appears that the NFHS wants us to call the violation when "A1 is first to touch the ball after it strikes the board" (of course the backboard is the same as the floor in this case).

So it appears that the NFHS wants us to wait until A1 touches the ball before we call the violation. Why would they want us to wait? Because a few things could happen that would prevent the violation? Like what? What could happen to prevent the illegal (double) dribble violation from being called?

A teammate touches the ball first? Sure, that would prevent the violation from being called, it's just a very odd, but legal, bounce pass.

An opponent touches the ball first? Sure, that would prevent the violation from being called, and the opponent would probably get credit for a steal.

The ball bounces of the real floor and then out of bounds? That can happen.

As the ball bounces on the real floor a foul is called, or the horn sounds to end the period? All certainly possible.

Bottom line, the NFHS wants us to wait until the ball handler touches the ball again before we call an illegal (double) dribble violation. Not when the ball is released (pushed), and not when the ball hits the floor (or the opponent's backboard). The NFHS wants us to wait until the ball handler touches the ball again (after the release, and after the ball hit the floor) and then, and only then, we can call the illegal (double) dribble violation.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Bottom line, the NFHS wants us to wait until the ball handler touches the ball again before we call an illegal (double) dribble violation. Not when the ball is released (pushed), and not when the ball hits the floor (or the opponent's backboard). The NFHS wants us to wait until the ball handler touches the ball again (after the release, and after the ball hit the floor) and then, and only then, we can call the illegal (double) dribble violation.

You're taking a special case (off the backboard) and trying to apply it generally. There are other more direct cases that indicate that it is a violation when the ball is pushed to the floor without mention of who touches it next, if anyone.

4.15.4 SITUATION A: 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 continue the dribble. RULING: When A1 palmed/carried the ball, the dribble ended and when he/she pushed the ball to the floor a violation occurred. (9-5)

The difference is in the ambiguity of the action. A throw off the backboard is an unusual action and it can go a lot of ways.

Pushing the ball straight down looking like the 1000 previous dribbles the player makes is unambiguous....it is a dribble the moment it leaves the hand.

Pushing the ball away, towards another player or a space, in a way that doesn't look like at all like a dribble may require waiting to confirm that it was a dribble.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

4.15.4 SITUATION A: 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 continue the dribble. RULING: When A1 palmed/carried the ball, the dribble ended and when he/she pushed the ball to the floor a violation occurred. (9-5)

Is this "carry violation" actually for an illegal dribble violation, or a travel violation? The casebook play doesn't differentiate. If it's a travel, you don't have to wait until the ball hits anything, the violation occurs right away.

I see a signal (carry/palming) in the rulebook, but I don't see a carry rule.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Is this "carry violation" actually for an illegal dribble violation, or a travel violation? The casebook play doesn't differentiate. If it's a travel, you don't have to wait until the ball hits anything, the violation occurs right away.

I see a signal (carry/palming) in the rulebook, but I don't see a carry rule.

This case play, like this thread, had nothing to do with traveling.

[BryanV21]

I only read the last page, so I may be missing something here. But isn't there a time when an official's judgment comes into play?

I mean, if an official feels the player has started a dribble, then the play is immediately whistled for a violation. If an official feels the player meant to pass the ball, then he should wait to see if another player touches the ball first or it goes out of bounds, and only whistle for a violation should the player that passed the ball touches it first. However, if an official isn't sure if it's the start of a dribble, then simply wait and see if the player that passed/dribbled touches it first, and only then whistle a violation.

Isn't that right? There's no one answer, and an official's judgment must come into play. Meaning that, without video or actually being there, you can't say one way or another.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

I only read the last page, so I may be missing something here. But isn't there a time when an official's judgment comes into play?

I mean, if an official feels the player has started a dribble, then the play is immediately whistled for a violation. If an official feels the player meant to pass the ball, then he should wait to see if another player touches the ball first or it goes out of bounds, and only whistle for a violation should the player that passed the ball touches it first. However, if an official isn't sure if it's the start of a dribble, then simply wait and see if the player that passed/dribbled touches it first, and only then whistle a violation.

Isn't that right? There's no one answer, and an official's judgment must come into play. Meaning that, without video or actually being there, you can't say one way or another.

Exactly.