Quote:
Originally Posted by just another ref
First of all, (I've seen this term here before) I don't really get what you mean by "technically" a travel. Traveling has no gray area. It is a travel or it isn't. Certainly some are easier to see than others, and, like most, I am in the camp of being certain. (If it might have been a travel, it ain't a travel.) Having said that, one can be certain and still be wrong. Looking at the evidence, it seems to me that recently in the NCAA we see roughly one wrongly called for every one hundred which are fairly obvious that are not called. This leads me to believe that, to some degree at least, the officials have been directed to let things slide, perhaps in the name of boosting the offense and producing a better product for the fans.
So, if a huge number of violations, some obvious, others not so much, are not called, this is what leads to the expectations mentioned above. It's not that they don't expect this violation to be called, but rather that they've seen it so many times without a call that they don't believe it to be a violation.
"They need to call it or change the rule."***
**Bob Knight, several years ago (paraphrased)
|
I'd rather miss one every time than EVER call one that isn't. I am someone who doesn't feel that there's a problem at all with traveling, however.
By rule, a player with one foot on a lane line is subject to being called for a three-second violation. Do we get such angina over this rule not being called strictly to the letter? Is there a cry to "change the rule?"
So the OP sees this play on SportsCenter and says, "That's a travel." Posts video here for everyone to see.
Serious question: Did he come here and post the video without looking at it a second or a third time (or in slow motion or stop-action)?
Again, I don't think there's a problem. The play in the video up top is consistently not called a travel. I wouldn't call it in a HS game. Matter of fact, I'm still not convinced there *is* a travel there. Surely I can't be the only one.