Video request: Xavier beats Creighton on final drive/foul

[bucky]

Originally Posted by sdoebler

For reference the call was made on white #4.

OK ,good. Thanks for clarification. I simply could not see on whom the foul was called. Now, given that #4 actually committed the foul, C should have just called it. I do not like L calling it on #4 as it is too straightlined. Whateves...

[ballgame99]

my $.02 :

1. that seems like a ticky tac travel but was technically right I guess.

2. I don't like that call but I don't hate it. Is this one that would have been called in the 1st quarter? I would say no, but this official had the best angle in the house and he did touch the off arm.

3. #4 fouled him. While I think the call was right, I do not like the L's position, that play was coming up the C side of the court the whole way, seems like L should have already turned that corner by the time the contact happened.

Great finish!

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by ballgame99

my $.02 :

1. that seems like a ticky tac travel but was technically right I guess.
...

Great finish!

It may be a "ticky-tack" travel call, but if you don't call it then you have to call an RA block on the defender. Is that the right thing to do, ignore a travel and call the subsequent block?

[VaTerp]

Play #1- I have the feet coming down simultaneously after the catch so either may be the pivot, which I have as the right foot and no travel.

Play #2- Contact with the right arm of the defender on the chest of an airborne shooter. Good call, poor closeout.

Play #3- Great get on #4. One of those plays where everyone in the gym thinks it on 32 because they are watching as fans and have no clue what officiating is about and refereering the whole play.

[Jesse James]

Originally Posted by Raymond

It may be a "ticky-tack" travel call, but if you don't call it then you have to call an RA block on the defender. Is that the right thing to do, ignore a travel and call the subsequent block?

I can’t believe the poobahs really want travels called when the feet are millinanoseconds from touching simultaneously.

If you’re shaving it that close, then Blueitt travels prior to the entry pass.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Jesse James

I can’t believe the poobahs really want travels called when the feet are millinanoseconds from touching simultaneously.

If your shaving it that close, then Blueitt travels prior to the entry pass.

So ignore the traveling, call the block?

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[Jesse James]

Originally Posted by Raymond

So ignore the traveling, call the block?

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Unless you want to be consistent, and grab every spin-move, and every jump stop that’s the least bit sloppy, and every gather on a dunk, and triple your whistle count for the night—then I’d say get the block

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by ballgame99

my $.02 :

1. that seems like a ticky tac travel but was technically right I guess.

Then you have to call a block/charge immediately after this play. That is the reason I posted the play. It was not just a play that was only a travel, it involved contact that took place right after the move. It is a dilemma, but it is something that has to consider. There are many times when we call a foul but we miss the travel that took place before. And I am not really saying that you should call the travel, just stating it appears he did travel.

Peace

[ballgame99]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Then you have to call a block/charge immediately after this play. That is the reason I posted the play. It was not just a play that was only a travel, it involved contact that took place right after the move. It is a dilemma, but it is something that has to consider. There are many times when we call a foul but we miss the travel that took place before. And I am not really saying that you should call the travel, just stating it appears he did travel.

Peace

I get it. And what I'm saying is we are on here arguing whether it was a travel or it wasn't. Would anyone argue that there was a foul on the defender following the "travel"? I'm going to say no. Now if the whole gym sees him travel get the travel, but I think you have to come out of this play with a foul.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by ballgame99

I get it. And what I'm saying is we are on here arguing whether it was a travel or it wasn't. Would anyone argue that there was a foul on the defender following the "travel"? I'm going to say no. Now if the whole gym sees him travel get the travel, but I think you have to come out of this play with a foul.

I have no problem if an official decides to come out with a foul instead of a travel. But I hate it when an official properly rules a play a travel and he gets criticized b/c other officials need to watch a replay to see it.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Raymond

I have no problem if an official decides to come out with a foul instead of a travel. But I hate it when an official properly rules a play a travel and he gets criticized b/c other officials need to watch a replay to see it.

Not to mention the fact that if it actually is a travel, even if it is very close, it is very unfair to penalize a defender with a block when trying to defend a player that traveled.

It is not all that different than a defender holding an opponent who then pushes off to get free. It would be the wrong thing to call the push off that everyone can see when you know the defender was holding.