A1 can come back in and control the ball provided he/she re-establishes himself/herself back in bounds, unless the referee deems he/she went out of bounds intentionally. Usually one would see this play as the momentum of the player carrying the player out of bounds, so the play would most llikely stand. Now he/she could not dribble if he/she had dribbled before the interrupted dribble.

 

As for the one comment of the play on the sideline of not calling a foul; it really depends on the type of game one has. I usee the technique many times to avoid calling fouls IF the game could handle the call. If it was a bloodbath, foul. These situations are just some of the many that seperate an "official" from a "great official". So it would depend on what kind of crew the game had as to whether it was really a callable foul.

 

:banana:

Here's another one,

Player H1 has another player A1 in a headlock. (literally) Referee calls nothing.

Player A1 finally gets out and says something to player H1. Referee under the basket closest to the play calls technical on player A1.

 

He/she needs to turn in the whistle. Call a foul on one or both of them, not call nothing then react like that when the player is upset. I would have been too!

 

:flame:

The player can dribble as long as they don't touch the ball with both hands - as in a double dribble.

 

Master are you sure the player does not have to have establish both feet inbounds?

 

 

Positive! :thumb:

A1 can come back in and control the ball provided he/she re-establishes himself/herself back in bounds, unless the referee deems he/she went out of bounds intentionally. Usually one would see this play as the momentum of the player carrying the player out of bounds, so the play would most llikely stand. Now he/she could not dribble if he/she had dribbled before the interrupted dribble.

 

 

 

:banana:

 

 

Would the bolded part only be true had the player actually gained control of the ball before throwing it back inbounds? In other words, IMO the player could resume dribbling had they batted the ball back inbounds instead of actually catching the ball and THEN throwing it back inbounds AS LONG AS they did not pick the ball up first when they came back inbounds.

I am going to say that if the player re-establishes himself inbounds (one foot and the other not out of bounds) and that he did not intentionally leave the floor of play (in order to avoid a foul or a pick, etc.) that they can be the first to touch the ball and gain control. If they had not already dribbled (as in stopping an errant pass) then they would still be permitted to dribble. If they had dribbled then they would still be able to pick the ball up but could not dribble.

 

Hope I get an A. I always liked the essay questions.

If they had dribbled then they would still be able to pick the ball up but could not dribble.

 

Hope I get an A. I always liked the essay questions.

 

What if they batted the ball ? Would they not be able to still dribble as long as they did not pick up the ball first?

Only info you need to know is player A1 in, not touching out of bounds while trying to save the ball. Player A1 can come back in bounds and continue to control the ball.

 

Like has been said, there are many factors going into what A1 can and can't do when they retrieve the ball.

 

If they were dribbling and lost it and saved it, then when they got back to it continued dribbling that would be legal, but when they got to it, if they just picked it up then they can not restart a dribble, because of the double dribble!

If it was an errant pass, they saved by batting it back in play, they can get it, pick it up, and then dribble it legally.

 

Now if they are trying to save the ball, but gain control of it(another Key) before they save it back into play before falling out of bounds, when they come back in to get it, if it's bouncing they can still continue the dribble, but if they pick it up, they can no longer dribble, because once they gained control and threw it back in, that constitutes the start of a dribble. So there only choice then would be to continue the dribble without picking it up, or pick it up and pass it.

 

And people think refereeing is easy. There are so many things to think about in this one play, how many more things do you think they have to think about before they make a single call! I wouldn't have this job for the world. These guys take all this critisism over a couple calls out of the 100 or so that they make every night. The way I look at it, if I had a test with a 100 questions on it, and i missed a couple of them, I would hope my teacher would still give me an A on the test. That is how people should see officiating, but that is not how it is. People only see the one or two they missed all night and have to continue to talk about it for a month. It's ridiculous, they need to go back and look at how many turnovers their team made and how many free throws they missed, especially the front end ones. I commend all the officials all over the state for the job they do and hope the good ones are rewarded with a state tournament appearance. Keep up the hard work guys, someones got to do it!

I would imagine that an interrupted dribble could be continued. This stuff is pretty tricky.

Now if they are trying to save the ball, but gain control of it(another Key) before they save it back into play before falling out of bounds, when they come back in to get it, if it's bouncing they can still continue the dribble, but if they pick it up, they can no longer dribble, because once they gained control and threw it back in, that constitutes the start of a dribble.

!

 

One caveat - the above is true (I think) as long as they had not been dribbling prior to losing control.

I would imagine that an interrupted dribble could be continued. This stuff is pretty tricky.

 

Again, that's the point. I watch a lot of games where folks around me nail refs for rules that simply do not exist. This one example has how many factors that have to be seen and processed before making the determination of whether or not to blow a whistle? Its crazy.

One caveat - the above is true (I think) as long as they had not been dribbling prior to losing control.

 

That is correct, if they had been dribbling, lost it, went to save it, GAINED CONTROL, then saved it back in, they WOULD NOT LEGALLY be able to come back in and get it. If they did, it would be like passing it to ones self. They would have a double dribble or travel, which ever they prefer. Rough calls, on someone hustling to keep the ball inbounds. But that is what the RULES say to do and not many that complain know much about the legality of ALL of the rules!

Like has been said, there are many factors going into what A1 can and can't do when they retrieve the ball.

 

If they were dribbling and lost it and saved it, then when they got back to it continued dribbling that would be legal, but when they got to it, if they just picked it up then they can not restart a dribble, because of the double dribble!

If it was an errant pass, they saved by batting it back in play, they can get it, pick it up, and then dribble it legally.

 

Now if they are trying to save the ball, but gain control of it(another Key) before they save it back into play before falling out of bounds, when they come back in to get it, if it's bouncing they can still continue the dribble, but if they pick it up, they can no longer dribble, because once they gained control and threw it back in, that constitutes the start of a dribble. So there only choice then would be to continue the dribble without picking it up, or pick it up and pass it.

 

And people think refereeing is easy. There are so many things to think about in this one play, how many more things do you think they have to think about before they make a single call! I wouldn't have this job for the world. These guys take all this critisism over a couple calls out of the 100 or so that they make every night. The way I look at it, if I had a test with a 100 questions on it, and i missed a couple of them, I would hope my teacher would still give me an A on the test. That is how people should see officiating, but that is not how it is. People only see the one or two they missed all night and have to continue to talk about it for a month. It's ridiculous, they need to go back and look at how many turnovers their team made and how many free throws they missed, especially the front end ones. I commend all the officials all over the state for the job they do and hope the good ones are rewarded with a state tournament appearance. Keep up the hard work guys, someones got to do it!

 

 

All very true! The ones that get me is calls being made from across the floor. If the guy right on the play doesn't see nothing then how in the world from across the floor do they see something. I really like the officals to get together on some calls about the ball going out, who they see touched it last. It really is a hard job, and I like for the offficals to go with some non-calls about things. No reaching in on the dribbler, I'd call this everytime. Body up on the player but to me reaching in and hitting arms, legs, waist, sholders, all to me are fouls. Great job guys!!

The ones that get me is calls being made from across the floor. If the guy right on the play doesn't see nothing then how in the world from across the floor do they see something.

 

Sometimes the guy that goes across the floor just wants to be noticed, and that is not good for officiating, but most of the time, either the play is going away from the ref that is right in front of it and can't see exactly what happened, such as a foul on the front side of the player, the other official may have gotten straight lined right behind the players and can't tell, that is where it's good for the other official to come over and get the call right. Also, it may be a case where there is a weaker official right in front of it and don't know or is scared to call something, so a stronger more experienced official will come and get a foul or violation that needs to be called. Sometimes it's necessary and sometimes it's not. I know it looks bad, but sometimes it just has to be done for the good of the game!

I am reading all these ideas and one thing keeps coming to mind. That this is nothing more than a pass to yourself. If you save a an errant pass from going out of bounds and then come back in to retrieve it, you have in essence passed the ball to yourself which is a walk. Also if you control a ball (ie two hands on the ball) and throw it back in play, you should not be able to start dribbling the bouncing ball-that would be a double dribble- you can not dribble again after contacting the ball with two hands.

 

I would think any scenario of saving a ball to yourself from out of bounds except when the player is continuing a dribble by this action would be a violation.

I am reading all these ideas and one thing keeps coming to mind. That this is nothing more than a pass to yourself. If you save a an errant pass from going out of bounds and then come back in to retrieve it, you have in essence passed the ball to yourself which is a walk.

 

Not entirely true. Assuming you have not used your dribble, you can pass the ball and then go get it. The pass is considered the same as starting a dribble. So, it would not be a violation if you have not used your dribble, passed the ball to A2, ran over to the ball because A2 ran the other way and continued your dribble as long as you did not first pick up the ball and THEN dribble.

 

Also if you control a ball (ie two hands on the ball) and throw it back in play, you should not be able to start dribbling the bouncing ball-that would be a double dribble- you can not dribble again after contacting the ball with two hands.

 

Partially correct. Had you already dribbled before saving the ball? If not, the throw is the start of a dribble. Thus, you can re-enter play and continue the dribble as long as you do not pick the ball up prior to the dribble. If you had already dribbled, then you are correct.