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

[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.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

On one foot, the player may jump off that foot and simultaneously land on both.

My first introduction to the travel rule being not about counting steps (as I had previously believed as a player), but about identifying the pivot foot and the restrictions on the pivot foot, occurred as a rookie official. Even though it was almost forty years ago, I can still remember our local interpreter, who was responsible for teaching our rookie rules training classes (preparing us to take the IAABO written rules exam), demonstrating, in a classroom setting, without a basketball, all the permutations, combinations, and gyrations of the travel rule (many years before the use of video for training) like he was teaching us dance steps (one, two, cha cha cha) in slow motion. Anybody walking by that classroom, at a local college, would have stopped, stared, and walked away scratching their heads.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

It has always been my contention that block/charge is not the most difficult call in basketball, it's traveling.