View Single Post
  #13 (permalink)  
Old Wed May 20, 2009, 10:33am
Ch1town
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally Posted by bbcof83 View Post
I have two questions about this:
1) Is the "places one foot on the floor" part important?
Absolutely, because placing one foot on the floor & crashing into the defender is not a travel.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bbcof83 View Post
If the offensive player crashes into the legal defender while in the air is this a block because the defender didn't allow space? I assume not since above it says "Guarding a player with the ball... time and space are of no consequence". Maybe I'm reading too much into it.
It all depends... did the offensive or defensive player violate verticality?
I think it should be a block as the defender has to allow the player to land after catching the ball in the air.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bbcof83 View Post
2) I am having trouble understanding why they decided to mention that many officials seem to be calling this traveling. Depending on the situation this could be called a multitude of different ways. I wish they would have expanded on why it specifically isn't a traveling violation. By wording it this way I have more questions than answers.
As you previously stated, in this partaicular sitch "one foot on the floor" prior to crashing into the defender is the key. Sometimes they land, turn & see the defender, get nervous & actually travel. I guess some officials were going with the travel as opposed to the PC no matter what happened prior to contact.

Last edited by Ch1town; Wed May 20, 2009 at 10:36am.
Reply With Quote