Spin move - Girls Basketball (Video)

[Pantherdreams]

Under that rule set its a travel.

(Not that is matters but NCAA and high school rule sets in USA only rule sets where it is still technically a travel.)

Didn't see a foul on rebound.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Pantherdreams

Under that rule set its a travel.

(Not that is matters but NCAA and high school rule sets in USA only rule sets where it is still technically a travel.)

Didn't see a foul on rebound.

And that may be true, but this is also where the game was established for the most part.

Peace

[#olderthanilook]

travel - left foot pivot foot lifted then returned to floor before releasing ball

no foul - no displacement or illegal use of hands

[Rich]

Trail not engaged at all on that drive.

I like to think I would've called that one. Maybe I'm fooling myself.

[TopicalTropical]

I'm not calling it. Listen, when I see players get an obvious advantage then yes, but to me this is just a good move by a good player and very difficult to see the travel in real time. I don't want refs to start automatically calling a travel when they see a spin move like this.


I posted at the Wichita thread video 3 it was a travel as well. Yeah, advantage gained even if it was slight. That one I think I would have called a travel but I can't fault the refs for missing it. Another good move but the player did shift his foot after the move. This one by the girl player was in one continuous motion and people can disagree but I'm not going to call it.

https://forum.officiating.com/basket...ays-video.html

[JRutledge]

I would have called it if I clearly saw the spin. If I did not, then I am not guessing. But most spin moves are travels. They just are. They are really not hard to see in many cases because we are giving a player a chance to make a move that is almost impossible to defend and allowing that move. We need to call this more. And I have called it and been told "That is not a travel" but those same people cannot tell me why it is not. Why do we allow a player to stop their dribble and completely spin without a dribble and claim that is an OK move? If they did the same thing without a dribble without a spin, we would cry foul. I do not get the logic why we do not call it other than it is often hard to tell when some players might have stopped their dribble.

Peace

[Chuga]

Hard to see real time, but when broken down, a definite travel. No foul on the rebound.

[ODog]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

... But most spin moves are travels. They just are. ...

Peace

Amen. By "most," it's higher than 99 percent too.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I would have called it if I clearly saw the spin. If I did not, then I am not guessing. But most spin moves are travels. They just are. They are really not hard to see in many cases because we are giving a player a chance to make a move that is almost impossible to defend and allowing that move. We need to call this more. And I have called it and been told "That is not a travel" but those same people cannot tell me why it is not. Why do we allow a player to stop their dribble and completely spin without a dribble and claim that is an OK move? If they did the same thing without a dribble without a spin, we would cry foul. I do not get the logic why we do not call it other than it is often hard to tell when some players might have stopped their dribble.

Peace

The thing is this -- when it's picked up THAT early, then it's easy to go right to the feet and get this. If I saw a travel in real time, I'd call it.

[Blindolbat]

Originally Posted by TopicalTropical

I'm not calling it. Listen, when I see players get an obvious advantage then yes, but to me this is just a good move by a good player and very difficult to see the travel in real time. I don't want refs to start automatically calling a travel when they see a spin move like this.


I posted at the Wichita thread video 3 it was a travel as well. Yeah, advantage gained even if it was slight. That one I think I would have called a travel but I can't fault the refs for missing it. Another good move but the player did shift his foot after the move. This one by the girl player was in one continuous motion and people can disagree but I'm not going to call it.

https://forum.officiating.com/basket...ays-video.html

Lol, you point out your own inconsistency and try to defend it. If you're only calling it when there is an "...advantage gained..." then how is this spin where the girl gets off the shot, not an advantage?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Pantherdreams

(Not that is matters but NCAA and high school rule sets in USA only rule sets where it is still technically a travel.)

What is the wording in other rules sets that makes this legal? (I'm not doubting you; I'm just curious)

[Pantherdreams]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

What is the wording in other rules sets that makes this legal? (I'm not doubting you; I'm just curious)

FIBA adopted the NBA "zero step" to allow these sorts of plays and rip and goes in transition.

Basically if you are ending your dribble or moving into a catch: The first step or foot on floor as you've caught/or gathered doesn't count as a step. Once you have 1 foot down and have caught the regular travel rules/ footwork as we would understand them come into play. next foot down is pivot foot etc.

[Pantherdreams]

For the record I prefer the NFHS/NCAA interpretation and just wish people would call the footwork, instead of letting pro footwork or lack there of become the norm and then adjusting the rule set accordingly.

[Jay R]

Originally Posted by Pantherdreams

For the record I prefer the NFHS/NCAA interpretation and just wish people would call the footwork, instead of letting pro footwork or lack there of become the norm and then adjusting the rule set accordingly.

Funny I like the new rule. This year, I felt I refereed travels more by the letter of the law (granted it's a new letter of the law) and thus I wasn't picking and choosing which travels to ignore.

[Pantherdreams]

Originally Posted by Jay R

Funny I like the new rule. This year, I felt I refereed travels more by the letter of the law (granted it's a new letter of the law) and thus I wasn't picking and choosing which travels to ignore.

Interesting. I found it much more difficult to be consistent on travel calls this year as result of the rule change and felt as a result me and crews we were a part of were calling less and then when looking at film later felt like I/we had missed some.