[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

Only because I'm sitting here trying to imagine a smiley face stuck up someone's a$$, let me throw in my two cents. First, isn't the very definition of Traveling (4-68-1): "Traveling occurs when a player holding the ball moves a foot or both feet in any direction in excess of prescribed limits described in this rule." And, don't the prescribed limits have to do specifically with a pivot foot? So, if a pivot foot "doesn't exist", how can there be a travel?

As far as Snaq's second example re: the post player, wouldn't that be covered by Art. 2: "A player who catches the ball with both feet on the playing court may pivot, using either foot. When one foot is lifted, the other is the pivot foot." So, as in baseball, there are no ties. One foot came off the ground first, therefore the other foot is the pivot (pick one), so a pivot foot has been established, and that play would be a travel.

A clever attempt. However, since your explanation rules out jumping or landing with both feet simultaneously, you have just eliminated the jumpstop from the game.

I like the way the NFHS handled it. They simply admit that this play needs its own caseplay and state that in this particular situation one foot must be considered the pivot.

4.44.3 SITUATION B: A1 receives the ball with both feet off the floor and he/she lands simultaneously on both feet without establishing a pivot foot. A1 then jumps off both feet in an attempt to try for goal, but realizing the shot may be blocked, A1 drops the ball to the floor and dribbles. RULING: A1 has traveled as one foot must be considered to be the pivot and must be on the floor when the ball is released to start a dribble. The fact that no pivot foot had been established does not alter this ruling.