"Shooter Changes His Mind" Travel (Video)

[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.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by just another ref

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

From the caseplay wording, how does one determine if the carry described (remember, it's not a real rule violation) is actually an illegal dribble, or a travel?

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by just another ref

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

This thread is about traveling because if you determined A1 to have started a dribble when dropping the ball, then by definition he lifted his pivot foot prior to releasing the ball for a dribble.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

This thread is about traveling because if you determined A1 to have started a dribble when dropping the ball, then by definition he lifted his pivot foot prior to releasing the ball for a dribble.

You're right, of course. I should have said traveling is only a by-product on this thread.

[potato]

It should be a double dribble more than a travel. Travel if he didn't start & ended his 1st dribble prior.

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 BadNewsRef

This thread is about traveling because if you determined A1 to have started a dribble when dropping the ball, then by definition he lifted his pivot foot prior to releasing the ball for a dribble.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by potato

It should be a double dribble more than a travel. Travel if he didn't start & ended his 1st dribble prior.

You want to explain what difference it makes?

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by potato

It should be a double dribble more than a travel. Travel if he didn't start & ended his 1st dribble prior.

Whether A1 dribbled prior to jumping and dropping the ball is irrelevant to whether or not he committed a violation in this play.

We are discussing the philosophy of when the violation occurs, immediately or after A1 retouches the ball.

[BryanV21]

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.

4-15-4b - Dribbling
"The dribbler palms/carries the ball by allowing it to come to rest in one or both hands."

Since there is another definition (4-44) for traveling, I would say this violation falls under "illegal dribble"

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

Since there is another definition (4-44) for traveling, I would say this violation falls under "illegal dribble"

I was under the impression that if a stationary ball handler (no movement of feet, thus no pivot foot involved) carries the ball that it was actually an illegal (double) dribble violation, and if the ball handler carries the ball while in motion that it was probably a travel violation (called immediately, don't wait for the next dribble). Am I wrong?

Also, I have always wondered why we have a definition of carrying, and a signal, but we don't actually have a violation for carrying? Why didn't the NFHS just stick with a simple illegal (double) dribble, or a travel? In other words, could we officiate a game without a carry definition, and without a carry signal, and still interpret the act (carry) as illegal?

[BryanV21]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

I was under the impression that if a stationary ball handler (no movement of feet, thus no pivot foot involved) carries the ball that it was actually an illegal (double) dribble violation, and if the ball handler carries the ball while in motion that it was probably a travel violation (called immediately, don't wait for the next dribble). Am I wrong?

Also, I have always wondered why we have a definition of carrying, and a signal, but we don't actually have a violation for carrying? Why didn't the NFHS just stick with a simple illegal (double) dribble, or a travel? In other words, could we officiate a game without a carry definition, and without a carry signal, and still interpret the act (carry) as illegal?

I think the problem is having a "double dribble" and "carry" signal. Just one "illegal dribble" signal should suffice. I mean, a "double dribble" is not the same as a "carry", so having different signals makes sense. If you want to put them together under "illegal dribble", then I'd say there should be a different signal.

Or... you know... put the definition of "carry", along with including it under "violations", in the rule book.