Last Second Shot: Kansas State at Kansas

[johnny d]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

This is a blatant traveling violation. The player took FOUR steps after ending his dribble. It is unfortunate that the winning score resulted from this. The defense didn't have a fair chance.

I don't think it is that blatant. I think and argument can be made that he did not actually end his dribble until his right foot is down. Then he steps with his left, jumps from that foot, and completes the layup. The play looks ugly because he lets the ball come up to his left shoulder, but until the point that his right hand touches the ball, we cannot know if he is going to legally dribble again, or end his dribble.

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by johnny d

I don't think it is that blatant. I think and argument can be made that he did not actually end his dribble until his right foot is down. Then he steps with his left, jumps from that foot, and completes the layup. The play looks ugly because he lets the ball come up to his left shoulder, but until the point that his right hand touches the ball, we cannot know if he is going to legally dribble again, or end his dribble.

Agree. It happens quick in real time. Fact is. Lot of these type travels aren't called in college. Didn't see the r st of game but I'm betting this wasn't the only one not called.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by johnny d

I don't think it is that blatant. I think and argument can be made that he did not actually end his dribble until his right foot is down. Then he steps with his left, jumps from that foot, and completes the layup. The play looks ugly because he lets the ball come up to his left shoulder, but until the point that his right hand touches the ball, we cannot know if he is going to legally dribble again, or end his dribble.

I see the same possibility. Told some folks that in a non-officiating forum. Definitely not 4 steps. The earliest he may have gathered is with the left foot down followed by a right foot-left foot step sequence, which would be a travel. But I could see an argument for that the gather wasn't complete until the right foot was down.

Bottom line, it's not as blatant as people want to make it seem. As Adam pointed out, the high dribble throws it off.

Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk

[crosscountry55]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

I see the same possibility. Told some folks that in a non-officiating forum. Definitely not 4 steps. The earliest he may have gathered is with the left foot down followed by a right foot-left foot step sequence, which would be a travel. But I could see an argument for that the gather wasn't complete until the right foot was down.

Bottom line, it's not as blatant as people want to make it seem. As Adam pointed out, the high dribble throws it off.

Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk

Count me in the camp that thinks this was not a travel, or perhaps a very marginal one at best. Not blatant. Also, it took me looking at the play in slow motion ten times to come to that conclusion, which says something. If I'm the slot and I'm not 110% sure in that situation, my lips are sealed.

What looks bad isn't always bad. I've had lots of occasions where I thought I might have missed a travel (as did one bench and half the crowd), only to look at the video later and determine that I indeed did not miss it. Of course I've also confirmed some of my own NCIs, but we won't talk about that.

Bottom line is that these types of travels are very hard to have a reasonable level of certainty on, especially when focusing on torsos and restricted areas at the same time. Many of them get missed. Maybe Steve Kerr is on to something with the idea of assigning a fourth official that focuses solely on travels. Not that I ever want that idea to come to fruition....

[dahoopref]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Bottom line, it's not as blatant as people want to make it seem. As Adam pointed out, the high dribble throws it off.

Originally Posted by crosscountry55

Bottom line is that these types of travels are very hard to have a reasonable level of certainty on, especially when focusing on torsos and restricted areas at the same time. Many of them get missed.

Thanks for the input fellas, lots of "bottom line" opinions.

I'm on the side with you guys as it's not as easy a call on the floor to make as it seems.

The peers in my area are of the mindset on this type of play (and I'm one to agree with): "I'd rather miss a violation that IS there, than call a violation that IS NOT there."