Thread: Todd Von Sossan
View Single Post
  #14 (permalink)  
Old Sun Jan 04, 2015, 07:18pm
Pantherdreams Pantherdreams is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: NB/PEI, Canada
Posts: 788
PLease ignore my soap box if it bothers you . .

Problems with missed travel calls:

1) Fouls are a judgement call (displacement, tower principle, etc).Travels are not. I understand that there technically still is some determination required as to when feet are lifted, location of the ball (gather, etc). But in an age of technology and video these are missed calls not differences of opinion when being evaluated or judged.

2) Non calling travels impacts the game in a much more difficult way for players to adjust. Players who routinely do not travel on takeoffs and finishes do so because of training and footwork. PLayers who routinely travel on takeoffs and finishes do so because of poor training or training habits. PLayers with bad footwork are clearly working on something else. Which means the coaches players who are working on footwork are not spending that time on tactics or conditioning which you as an official have now put more of a premium on. Perhaps more importantly bad footwork is quicker and more difficult to defend and players with good footwork are not going naturally or easily start using bad footwork to balance the game out. They can much more easily adjust to how much contact to create or play through.

3) Problem with only calling the borderline ones is that we know there are various levels and skills in regards to officiating games. If weaker officials are only calling the ones they are certain then borderline is now totally subjective and coaches/players are not learning and expecting the rule to be officiated diligently. We can say that kids should adjust but footwork is ingrained more so then how much contact to create or play through.

4) Often not calling travels can put kids at a disadvantage in terms of their development. We see kids in our corner of the world play in middle and school and even high school leagues where the standard for travels is not very high then suddenly compete at national tournaments or other high level high stakes events with top level officiating that is targeting footwork and suddenly they can't play because habits have been engrained. THis is not an officiating problem but as a stake holder in the game and its development it is a concern.

5) Gender bias? I'm not saying this in intentional but more a product of the speed or athleticism of the game. I would say it is much more difficult to be "certain" on a lot of plays in guys games then it would be similar plays in a females game. This is just because of the explosiveness of the player taking off. We might be fine with this and it might even be a necessary evil, but again under video scrutiny we could be calling one action a travel vs women because we are sure, and letting guys do it because we aren't as sure . . .

FYI: Please be aware that there are differences in some of the language between FIBA and NFHS in regards to calling some elements of travelling which would make a number of plays we look at travels but would not be in NFHS standards. Specifically in lifting the pivot foot to begin a dribble.
__________________
Coach: Hey ref I'll make sure you can get out of here right after the game!

Me: Thanks, but why the big rush.

Coach: Oh I thought you must have a big date . . .we're not the only ones your planning on F$%&ing tonite are we!

Last edited by Pantherdreams; Sun Jan 04, 2015 at 07:20pm.
Reply With Quote