What's new
By:

Misunderstood Rules of the NBA

Darkwing Duck said:
Malone traveled a fair amount where it wasn't called. They also don't like to call it unless it gives the offensive player an advantage (see Dan Majerle).
Click to expand...
Agree; LeBron often got away with the "crab-dribble," Shaq in his prime would get away with an extra hop-step in the lane, and often when Malone would shoot his half-turn/half-face-up jumper on the left block - he would slide his pivot foot before going up for his shot (a perfect example on the basket that gave him 50 pts against Seattle in 2000). Hakeem had beautiful footwork, but he also would routinely take an extra step on his counter moves. (Random aside: If you ever go back and re-watch Game 5 of the '97 WCF [can be found on youtube], coming out of timeouts everyone in the Delta Center would be making the travelling motion to remind the officials to keep an eye on it. They finally called it and the place went bonkers.)

The subjectivity over travel no-calls never bothered me as much as the inconsistencies with illegal defenses and 3-seconds.
 
vslice02 said:
The nba-call that drives me crazy is the pseudo-double-dribble. If a player gets two hands on the ball and then fumbles it away - then picks it up, then dribbles - that's a legal play because nba officials will say "he never had complete control of the basketball." The rule should be - if you have 2 hands on the ball and then it touches the floor - you used up your dribble.
Click to expand...

...THAT'S another violation they never call in the NBA...but was always called when I was growing up playing basketball! Your ABSOLUTELY correct! You catch the ball, drop the ball...start dribbling, you have DOUBLE DRIBBLED! Technically, the way they call it now or don't call it...you could drop the ball all the way to the basket until you got close enough to shoot...and it wouldn't be a violation, right???
 
carolinajazz said:
...THAT'S another violation they never call in the NBA...but was always called when I was growing up playing basketball! Your ABSOLUTELY correct! You catch the ball, drop the ball...start dribbling, you have DOUBLE DRIBBLED! Technically, the way they call it now or don't call it...you could drop the ball all the way to the basket until you got close enough to shoot...and it wouldn't be a violation, right???
Click to expand...
YES! I remember hearing Ronnie Nunn explain the way they call it...that in the NBA - regardless whether the ball hits the floor, if you did not intentionally dribble - then you retain your dribble. Ridiculous!
 
Ah, I see, so if I knock down a pass from the opposing team with both hands, and pick it up and dribble, it's a travel.

Gotcha.
 
No , but if you catch it and dribble it, and pick it up , and dribble it again, the rules say it is not a travel , but the rules is stupid.
 
northeast said:
No , but if you catch it and dribble it, and pick it up , and dribble it again, the rules say it is not a travel , but the rules is stupid.
Click to expand...

I have never seen a guy catch a ball, dribble it, pick it up, dribble again, and have it not called traveling or double dribble.
 
Darkwing Duck said:
I have never seen a guy catch a ball, dribble it, pick it up, dribble again, and have it not called traveling or double dribble.
Click to expand...

Just do 10 minutes of research on youtube. There is a great one where a player dribbles 3 or 4 times on a fast break, picks up the ball to avoid someone swiping at it, then dribbles a couple more times before a dunk...all with a ref following him down the sidelines. It happens.

Case in point:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Sjf2xCUmm0

(note: there is a better one than this, but this one came up right away searching for double dribble...note he catches it with both hands, dribbles once, then picks it up, changes hands, and dribbles again to the dunk)
 
LogGrad98 said:
Just do 10 minutes of research on youtube. There is a great one where a player dribbles 3 or 4 times on a fast break, picks up the ball to avoid someone swiping at it, then dribbles a couple more times before a dunk...all with a ref following him down the sidelines. It happens.

Case in point:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Sjf2xCUmm0

(note: there is a better one than this, but this one came up right away searching for double dribble...note he catches it with both hands, dribbles once, then picks it up, changes hands, and dribbles again to the dunk)
Click to expand...


That's certainly a missed violation, but it's because the refs missed it rather than a misinterpretation of a rule.
 
Darkwing Duck said:
Do you know what the word "catch" means?
Click to expand...

If you have enough control of the ball to dribble it, then you have control of it. You don't need two hands on the ball to have control of it. Sorry for confusing the issue by using the word "catch". I doubt there is anything in the rules about catching it first. The league should just say that you can't double dribble. They shouldn't leave it up to the refs as to whether the player meant to double dribble, to be a mind-reader regarding the player's intent.

However, the interpretation of this rule does not bother me , I just find it curious.

What really bugs me is how the refs call offensive fouls , blocking fouls, and positioning fouls. It's just terrible. Doesn't make sense. Unfair. And the refs get it wrong way too much. The league really ought to rethink and retool both the rules, and the implementation of the rules, and fix this.
 
Last edited:
northeast said:
If you have enough control of the ball to dribble it, then you have control of it. You don't need two hands on the ball to have control of it. Sorry for confusing the issue by using the word "catch". I doubt there is anything in the rules about catching it first. The league should just say that you can't double dribble. They shouldn't leave it up to the refs as to whether the player meant to double dribble, to be a mind-reader regarding the player's intent.

However, the interpretation of this rule does not bother me , I just find it curious.

What really bugs me is how the refs call offensive fouls , blocking fouls, and positioning fouls. It's just terrible. Doesn't make sense. Unfair. And the refs get it wrong way too much. The league really ought to rethink and retool both the rules, and the implementation of the rules, and fix this.
Click to expand...

You have to define control in order for the rule to be able to be consistently called. Fumbling the ball, as Lewis does in the video, is not having control of the ball. The ball hitting the floor while in the process of fumbling the ball is really irrelevant.

Blocking-Charging is one of the hardest, if not the hardest, situation to call for any referee in any sport. Most fans do not understand this. These calls are determined by milliseconds and millimeters, from head to toe. The defensive player has a right to maintain a legal defensive position and take an offensive foul if the offensive player initiates contact while the defensive player has legal position and has done so before the offensive player has gone into a shooting motion. The common notion that "having feet set" is the end all, be all of calling charges and blocks is completely inaccurate. A defensive player can move his feet and take a charge, so long as he has proper body position.
 
It was close, but I would say he had control of the ball. I would advocate cleaning up the rules, and just say that you can't dribble, pick up your dribble, and dribble again. If you dribbled the ball, you had control of it. No grey area. No mess, no fuss. Take the arbitrariness out of the equation as much as possible.
 
As for the offensive fouls, I agree that having the feet set is not the be all and end all, and this is precisely one of the many reasons that the refs get the call wrong so often, that they are just focusing too much on whether the feet are set, though they often get that wrong too.

As I said, there are two problems.

1. The rules themselves are bad, as they are currently being interpreted.

2. The refs make the call incorrectly too often.
 
Darkwing Duck said:
That's certainly a missed violation, but it's because the refs missed it rather than a misinterpretation of a rule.
Click to expand...

I don't think the issue is as much a misinterpretation on the part of the officials, but rather often simply not being willing to call it.
 
LogGrad98 said:
I don't think the issue is as much a misinterpretation on the part of the officials, but rather often simply not being willing to call it.
Click to expand...

If a ref had a clear view and would have seen that, he would have called it. More likely a foul first, though.
 
Darkwing Duck said:
If a ref had a clear view and would have seen that, he would have called it. More likely a foul first, though.
Click to expand...

I figure you are right, but go look at the 0:04 mark and the 0:13-0:15 second mark. The ref is right on his elbow and seems to be watching him pretty intently. Not sure how he missed that. I don't believe in the conspiracy crap about refs, but I do believe they knowingly let some things like this slide.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top