Hitting the Ball with One's Fist
 

This happened in a men's league game I was officiating:

A1 is bringing the ball up, dribbling in his backcourt. He's not covered, but he loses the handle on the ball. It's rolling slowly in front of him when he strikes it with the heel of his closed hand to get it to bounce back up so that he can continue dribbling it.

I'd never seen that before. My first thought was: Wait is that a violation for striking the ball with a fist? But Men's league + Team B not playing defense = no whistle.

But would you call this in a Varsity high school game? Would it matter whether Team B had caused the interrupted dribble or not?

Also got me wondering: what's the intended reasoning behind the rule? Is it a control issue? Or a safety issue?

The purpose of the rule is so players don't come in flying with a fist in a crowd, miss...and clobber someone upside the head.

If he hit it with the heel of his hand while having a closed fist then it sounds like he didn't actually punch the ball.

Basketball, Or Punch Ball ???
 

Riddle Me This, Batman ...
 

If the ball had definitely stopped bouncing on the floor, maybe it was motionless, and just sitting there, and if the ball handler never touched the ball with both hands, or held the ball, would one allow the ball handler to just keep on dribbling? The dribble never really ended? Right?

4-15-4: The dribble ends when:
a. The dribbler catches or causes the ball to come to rest in one or both
hands.
b. The dribbler palms/carries the ball by allowing it to come to rest in one or
both hands.
c. The dribbler simultaneously touches the ball with both hands.
d. The ball touches or is touched by an opponent and causes the dribbler to
lose control.
e. The ball becomes dead.

If the ball is "just sitting there" it's at rest. If he now touches the ball it's "at rest in one hand". Sounds like this ends the dribble to me.

No. It isn't "in one hand".

Define "in one hand."

Really?

Just touching the ball certainly isn't.

You're saying this is a legal play?

What makes it illegal?

Dunno. It just seems illegal.

The comes to rest in one hand thing was the best I could do on short notice.

Well, how about this....

There is no limit on how high a dribble can go. Right? Wouldn't this just be a really short dribble?

I might agree with you in the spirit of the rule if the player deliberately pinned the ball between his hand and the floor. That could be argued to be at rest in the hand.

However, a momentary contact isn't at rest in the hand any more than it would be on every dribble. It may be at rest on the floor, but that is not the same as in the hand.

That's exactly what he did. It will never happen in a game. But if it does, I think I would call it a violation.

Fisting, just don't verbalize the violation in a gym full of moms.

Would not have a violation on the OP's play.

Fisting is still illegal in 23 states.

I don't have a violation. The heel of ones hand is still part of the hand. The fist is the when the hand is balled up and struck with, well the fist (knuckles).

Let's say I'm dribbling, then the ball comes to rest on the floor after I... I don't know... drop it. I can then slap the ball so that it starts bouncing and continue my dribble?

I know it's very unlikely for this to ever happen, but I don't see how this would be legal. I know, by rule, it's hard to say the dribble ended.

I don't see how it would be illegal.

That's my point... neither do I. But while the rules on how a dribble ends don't work in this case, it surely seems like the dribble ended.

Yep, and a high dribble "seems" like a carry, but.... :)

Good point.

When the ball is stationary on the floor, if you slap it enough to make it bounce again, it is pinned to the floor, although briefly. This still seems like the ball is "at rest in the hand" to me. I see no time limit on "at rest."

If the ball is resting on the floor, it's not resting in the hand.

emphasis on IN

If it's pinned between the two, why is it not resting in/on both? Why is this different than when the dribbler pins the ball to his own leg?

Ball pinned on leg is caught. dribble rule says it ends if caught or comes to rest….

when it is sitting on the floor it is in contact with what it is that makes it a dribble. the floor. all, theory, havnt thought through. sounded good to me...

Actually, it isn't.

Smacking the ball with the heel of the hand isn't pinning it unless you consider every single dribble a carry because the ball is merely in contact with the hand for a moment. That is essentially the bar your trying to establish here.

Pinning it to the floor would be leaving the hand on the ball and holding it in place, not smacking it.

It may not be if he actually pinned it to the floor, but he didn't. He batted the ball, that's all. That is just another dribble.

As for the leg analogy, the ball touching the leg on the way down or even while in contact with the dribbler's hand is nothing. The ball must get "caught" there, frozen between the hand and leg, for it to be a violation.

For how long? If the ball is in contact with two things on opposite sides at the same time, seems to me that it might be considered pinned.

In other words stationary, motionless, just like it is on the floor in the play at hand.

Omg, let it rest guys.

See what I did there??

Without his hand there, it's still going to rest on the floor.
Without his hand there, it's not going to stick to his leg.

That's the difference, but I think you know that.

Now we're just talking gravity. The dribbler is ultimately responsible. How it got there doesn't matter. If the ball becomes pinned between the hand and anything, it seems to me that would end the dribble.

"anything?" You've got two options, really. The floor, or his person. If it's his person, then we generally consider him to be holding it. There's nothing about the floor that requires us to consider it the same as his leg.

The ball is not allowed to be stationary while in contact with the hand during a dribble. That is my interpretation. Having said that, I've never seen this happen and don't expect to see it. Seeing it in a game context might change this interpretation.

If that is the case, then you'll be calling a an illegal dribble after every single bounce if the dribbler is not moving. If the ball is going straight up and down, it is stationary for a moment on every single dribble at the apex of the dribble....and that is when the hand is usually in contact with the ball.

At rest in the hand isn't talking about it being momentarily stationary while touching the hand but being in constant contact for more than a brief contact with the hand (i.e, more than a bat or a tap) such that without the hand it would fall free.

I didn't word it the best, but I was still referring to the ball being pinned between the hand and whatever. When the ball is pinned long enough that it is discernibly stationary, I'm thinking that's too long.

After listening to this argument go back and forth, I feel like hitting a lot more than the ball with the heel of my fist!:D

I'm done.

sorry, Dad....

Glad to see the anger management classes have been helping.:D dont schedule them in the afternoon next time. I was looking for you in a few places earlier in the day....;)