Spin move - Girls Basketball (Video)
 

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/oRK3Scz1id8" frameborder="0" allow="autoplay; encrypted-media" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Peace

Obvious travel, which is never called. So it's understandable that the officials don't get it. No foul on the rebound.

Agreed with Scrapper.

It was a travel..... it was not a foul....

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

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

no foul - no displacement or illegal use of hands

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

Trail not engaged at all on that drive.

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

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

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

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

I honestly hope this doesn't sound like I'm being a jerk, but what other rule sets -- plural -- are there? I only know of NBA, and they haven't called traveling the same as the rest of the world in 50 years.

Now that I think about it, I suppose technically FIBA rules are in the USA, since the USA does send international teams into competition. But I think their travel rule is the same as NCAA, isn't it?

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?

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

Not anymore. As of 2017, FIBA has adopted the NBA interpretation when it comes to the end of a dribble. The nice thing about that interpretation is that you're not passing on the travel, it is not a travel. The FIBA rule book is online in case some of you doubt me.

Why is this "nice"? If everybody here agrees that this is a travel, but it's never called, why isn't it called? I called it for years, but finally decided that it truly was unfair and counterproductive when "they've been letting him do that all year."

It's always nice when the letter of the law adapts to what's expected.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

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.

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.

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.

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.

I know I am late jumping into the discussion, but whether one judges this to be a Travel is determined by when (and in what manner) one judges the dribble to have ended. Keep in mind that the entire spin move ending with the release of the Ball by B5 for her FGA was just under one second.

When I first viewed the play I judged it to be not a Travel. I judged B5 to have ended her Dribbler to have ended her Dribble when she simultaneously touched the Ball with both hands.

Her spin moves starts after 0:23 of the video and ends with her releasing the ball before 0:25 of the video. B5's spin move is extremely fast. (And I had to left click on the mouse quickly to be able to stop action the video.)

The question is: Did she end her Dribble by simultaneously touched the Ball with both hands when A) her left foot was in contact with the Floor or, B) after lifting her left foot off the Floor and either: i) while both of her feet were off the Floor or ii) when her right foot had just made contact with the Floor?

I would be willing to bet dollars to donuts that a poll would show the answers to be evenly divided between Bi and Bii.

But my more pressing concern is that I believe that the T should have been much closer to the play; I would have liked to have seen him Closing Down on the play. There was no way that the C was going to get a good look at the play because there were too many players blocking his view.

Just my humble opinion.

MTD, Sr.

That's not the right question because the dribble ended before that -- certainly by the time she is cupping the ball against her side with the left foot clearly on the floor -- you can see that at 23 seconds.

Bob:

That is a valid point. If in one's judgement one believes that the Dribble ended with B5 "cupping" the Ball against side of her torso, then I would agree with a Travel. I believe that it is difficult to tell from the video. I think that you would agree that one of three things, that you and I have mentioned, happened before B5 released the Ball on her FGA. So the result of my poll would then be evenly divided among three possible outcomes.

That is why I had concerns about the T not Closing Down to get a better (and closer) look at B5's actions.

MTD, Sr.

Mark,
So let's just say you are not calling a travel violation because B5 has not controlled the ball until she grabs it with two hands. What if the defender fouls her during the spin? Is this a continuation foul???
:D

1) There is no such thing as a "continuation foul".

2a) Bob has brought up a could point: When did B5 stop her dribble?

2b) Between Bob and me there are four possible points in her spin move where B5 could be judged to have ended her Dribble.

2c) Bob is younger than me and has better eye sight. In his judgement B5 ended her Dibble by cupping the Ball with her right hand against the right side of her torso while her left foot is in contact with the Floor. I agree with Bob that B5's foot work after she stopped her Dribble by cupping the Ball to her torso and before she released the Ball for a FGA constitutes a Traveling Violation.

3a) I am old and my eye sight is not as good as that young whippersnapper Bob's eyesight, :p. Based upon viewing of the video I do not have B5 committing a Travel Violation because of when and how she ended her Dribble.

3b) B5 gained Player Control of the Ball when she caught the Pass from B4. She maintained PC of the Ball until she released the Ball for a FGA. B5's Act of Shooting began when she ended her dribble and the Act of Shooting did not end until B5 returned to the Floor after releasing the Ball for the FGA. Therefore, if a Player from Team A had fouled B5 at any point after she ended her Dribble and before she returned to the Floor after releasing the Ball for the FGA, B5 would have been fouled in the Act of shooting.

But I want to reiterate, that from the moment that B5 started her spin to the moment that she released the Ball for her FGA, no more than 1.5 seconds, maybe less (I am leaning toward less, maybe barely one second). And an official has to make a decision as to where and how B5 stopped her Dribble based upon what an Player whose motion took less than a second. That is why I have no problem with Bob having a Travel Violation and another official have no Travel Violation. The players are just getting too darn quick. LOL!

MTD, Sr.