[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Oh? Then whyinhell does the very definition of a foul states that it involves ILLEGAL contact? Riddle me that, Batman!

If a player commits a foul with an over- extended elbow or pivots with his elbow moving faster than the fulcrum of his pivot, then that player has just committed an illegal pivot. He doesn't have to travel during that illegal pivot either to commit a violation. He may have committed a violation if the elbow was swung faster than the rest of the body while pivoting but no contact was made. That's an illegal pivot that hasn't got a damn thing to do with traveling. And if he makes contact during that illegal pivot, he's just committed a foul.

Your statement above makes zero sense, rules-wise, imo.

If you really think that any player on the court can commit a foul while performing a LEGAL act under the written rules, I'd sureasheck like to know where you came up with something like that. I sureasheck can't think of anything anywhere in the rules that espouses any philosophy like that.

JR:

You are a far better interpreter of the rules of basketball than your recent posts in this thread reveal.

A "legal" pivot movement of the ball handler's feet are those movements that are in compliance with the rules of traveling. The NFHS and NCAA Rules committees should never have used the word "legal" with the word "pivot" when discussing the improper swinging of the elbows.

MTD, Sr.