Backcourt Violation called (Video) - Was this the right call?

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

He traveled. Period. I am 100% that I whistle that. I'm looking closely at his landing on such a play so seeing the extra step should be easy.

Agree. However, as the trail I would have been so intent on instantly determining that this was a backcourt exception, that I may have overlooked the travel. I would hope that I would catch it, but may have been distracted by the bang bang exception.

[bucky]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Agree. However, as the trail I would have been so intent on instantly determining that this was a backcourt exception, that I may have overlooked the travel. I would hope that I would catch it, but may have been distracted by the bang bang exception.

I would hazard to guess that many officials would do the same. They would be so excited to know the rule explicitly, not call a violation, and overlook the obvious travel. Everyone (coaches/players/spectators) else would be doing the same. They would anxiously be waiting for the BC ruling that most would not realize such an obvious travel.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by bucky

I would hazard to guess that many officials would do the same. They would be so excited to know the rule explicitly, not call a violation, and overlook the obvious travel. Everyone (coaches/players/spectators) else would be doing the same. They would anxiously be waiting for the BC ruling that most would not realize such an obvious travel.

Ignore the potential backcourt violation. I see officials not call that move a travel frequently....without anything else complicating things.

[#olderthanilook]

RE: traveling violation - does the T have the proper angle that allows him to definitively see the status of the ball and player control? I'm not certain he does from what this video reveals. And, that's essential when determining if a traveling violation occurs. I'm not even sure the C has a good secondary look.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by #olderthanilook

RE: traveling violation - does the T have the proper angle that allows him to definitively see the status of the ball and player control? I'm not certain he does from what this video reveals. And, that's essential when determining if a traveling violation occurs. I'm not even sure the C has a good secondary look.

It's also essential to ruling a BC violation on a throw-in.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Ignore the potential backcourt violation. I see officials not call that move a travel frequently....without anything else complicating things.

Yep. I think that "we" tend to give a little more than the strict reading of the rules allow when a player catches a pass and sometimes when they come to a stop on a (moving) dribble.

[Matt S.]

As a friend and high-level official likes to say, 'don't go looking for boogers.'

If you're calling anything on this, it's a booger.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Yep. I think that "we" tend to give a little more than the strict reading of the rules allow when a player catches a pass and sometimes when they come to a stop on a (moving) dribble.

"We" includes me. If it isn't 100% obvious and certain...no travel. If there is a gray area with regards to whether the player had "caught" the ball or not, the player didn't catch the ball.

[ilyazhito]

That's why I wouldn't have a travel. The player touched the ball in the frontcourt, but only controlled it in the backcourt. There must be player control for both a backcourt violation and for traveling, and since there was no player control, neither rule was violated.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by ilyazhito

That's why I wouldn't have a travel. The player touched the ball in the frontcourt, but only controlled it in the backcourt. There must be player control for both a backcourt violation and for traveling, and since there was no player control, neither rule was violated.

He controlled the ball while airborne. No doubt, especially in slow motion replay. He controlled the ball while having frontcourt status (jumped from frontcourt).

But even with airborne control, it can't be a backcourt violation because of the throwin exception, not due to lack of player control.

But with airborne control the player in the video definitely traveled, lifting the first foot to touch down, the pivot foot, said foot returning to the floor (before the ball is released on a pass or a try).

The recent question being discussed is whether, or not, the calling official would get a good look and be able to see the travel without the benefit of a slow motion replay?

Most of us don't call fouls, or violations unless we're sure.

Two things taught to us by that great basketball official Confucius that are worth remembering:

You are where you were until you get where you're going.

When in doubt, don't be.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

He controlled the ball while airborne. No doubt, especially in slow motion replay. He controlled the ball while having frontcourt status (jumped from frontcourt).

But even with airborne control, it can't be a backcourt violation because of the throwin exception.

But with airborne control it can still be a travel violation, lifting the first foot to touch down, the pivot foot.

That's not illegal. The pivot must be returned to the floor for a traveling violation to occur, unless the player starts a dribble.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

That's not illegal. The pivot must be returned to the floor for a traveling violation to occur, unless the player starts a dribble.

Good point. Thanks. I'll correct it.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

But with airborne control the player in the video definitely traveled, lifting the first foot to touch down, the pivot foot, said foot returning to the floor (before the ball is released on a pass or a try).

Hiding the ball under his wing. Didn't start a dribble. Not passing. Not shooting. Travel? Not yet. Be patient, and he'll eventually travel.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Good point. Thanks. I'll correct it.
....

Well, actually the first foot to touch may return to the floor if A1 executes a proper jump stop.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Raymond

Well, actually the first foot to touch may return to the floor if A1 executes a proper jump stop.

I don't believe that the player in the video meets the following parameters for such a legal jump stop:

Traveling is moving a foot or feet in any direction in excess of prescribed limits
while holding the ball. The limits on foot movements are as follows:
A player, who catches the ball while moving or dribbling, may stop,
and establish a pivot foot as follows:
a. If both feet are off the floor and the player lands:
3. On one foot, the player may jump off that foot and simultaneously land
on both. Neither foot can be a pivot in this case.
After coming to a stop and establishing a pivot foot:
a. The pivot foot may be lifted, but not returned to the floor, before the ball is
released on a pass or try for goal.
b. If the player jumps, neither foot may be returned to the floor before the ball
is released on a pass or try for goal.
c. The pivot foot may not be lifted before the ball is released, to start a dribble.

Once that second (nonpivot) foot comes down, his legal options become more restricted. And even further restricted if the pivot foot is lifted (no dribble allowed).

Nevadaref and Raymond make great points. It has always been my contention that block/charge is not the most difficult call in basketball, it's traveling. That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

I don't believe that the player in the video meets the following parameters for such a legal jump stop:

...

I didn't say he did. I'm correcting your post where you said the first foot to touch the floor cannot retouch the floor prior to shooting or passing the ball.

But with airborne control it can still be a travel violation, lifting the first foot to touch down, the pivot foot, said foot may not return to the floor before the ball is released on a pass or a try.