Fun With Up And Down ...

[Danvrapp]

I would have enjoyed seeing this video go another 10-15 seconds. The coach is on his way to talk with T about why the no call, and I did not see ANY of the 3 officials give any signal that they saw (or didn't see...?) what happened. It would have been interested to see how the trail handled it and how easily the coach was pacified.

In a situation like this, if I see it, I will give a signal that does not look unlike trying to juggle a few imaginary balls. Often as an official, I try to remember we may be the only link between what actually happened on the floor and what the fans/coaches may have seen.

For the record, I agree with the no call, per the discussion indicates.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Danvrapp

I did not see ANY of the 3 officials give any signal that they saw (or didn't see...?) what happened. It would have been interested to see how the trail handled it and how easily the coach was pacified.

Perhaps all three officials were unaware of the twenty-year old annual interpretation, believing this to be a try for goal, allowing the shooter to retrieve his own airball.

Imagine three officials, possibly all with nineteen years experience or less, not knowing this single year interpretation from twenty years ago.

My pet peeve. Stupid NFHS.

Or all three saw the blocked shot and ruled correctly.

[Stat-Man]

Originally Posted by Danvrapp

I would have enjoyed seeing this video go another 10-15 seconds. The coach is on his way to talk with T about why the no call, and I did not see ANY of the 3 officials give any signal that they saw (or didn't see...?) what happened. It would have been interested to see how the trail handled it and how easily the coach was pacified.

In a situation like this, if I see it, I will give a signal that does not look unlike trying to juggle a few imaginary balls. Often as an official, I try to remember we may be the only link between what actually happened on the floor and what the fans/coaches may have seen.

Perhaps the officials gave no signal because there was none to give. In many areas, non-approved signals are discouraged and veteran officials often emphasize during camps or pre-season scrimmages, "If you have nothing, signal nothing."

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Danvrapp

I would have enjoyed seeing this video go another 10-15 seconds. The coach is on his way to talk with T about why the no call, and I did not see ANY of the 3 officials give any signal that they saw (or didn't see...?) what happened. It would have been interested to see how the trail handled it and how easily the coach was pacified.

In a situation like this, if I see it, I will give a signal that does not look unlike trying to juggle a few imaginary balls. Often as an official, I try to remember we may be the only link between what actually happened on the floor and what the fans/coaches may have seen.

For the record, I agree with the no call, per the discussion indicates.

That would not be the best signal as “the juggle” signal merely indicates a momentary loss of control or a lack of control during an initial catch attempt. In this case that would still mean that the play is a traveling violation.
If you wish into indicate that this play was legal, then you should use the “defensive tip” signal which the NFHS just put in for backcourt situations. That would communicate to everyone that you saw a touch by the defense which caused the loss of control.

[Danvrapp]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

If you wish into indicate that this play was legal, then you should use the “defensive tip” signal which the NFHS just put in for backcourt situations. That would communicate to everyone that you saw a touch by the defense which caused the loss of control.

That's a great point, and you are correct!

+1!

[BillyMac]

https://storage.googleapis.com/refqu...np1IPHkf5s.mp4

Disclaimer: For IAABO Eyes Only. Below is not a NFHS interpretation, it's only an IAABO International interpretation which obviously doesn't mean a hill of beans to most members of this Forum.

IAABO International Play Commentary: Correct Answer: This is a legal play.

Blue #4 catches the ball in the lane and establishes his left foot as the pivot foot before jumping to attempt a try. After establishing a pivot foot, the pivot foot may be lifted but not returned to the floor before the ball is released on a pass or try for goal. (4-44-3a)

In this play, Blue #4 does lift the pivot foot and return to the floor with the ball before releasing the ball on a pass or try. However, while Blue #4 is airborne, White #22 makes contact with the ball, causing Blue #4 to momentarily lose control of the ball. Blue #4, while airborne, regains control and returns to the floor with the ball.

This is a legal play. Because the defender caused the shooter to lose control, it is legal for Blue #4 to regain control, return to the floor with the ball and establish a pivot foot. (4-44-2a) In this play, Blue #4 landed simultaneously on both feet and once again established the left foot as the pivot foot when he stepped with the right foot to make a move to the basket and attempt another try.

For further study on these types of plays, please refer to casebook 4.44.3 Situation A:

4.44.3 SITUATION A: A1 jumps to try for goal. B1 also jumps and: (a) slaps the ball out of A1’s hands; (b) touches the ball but does not prevent A1 from releasing the ball; (c) touches the ball and A1 returns to the floor holding the ball; or (d) touches the ball and A1 drops it to the floor and touches it first after it bounces. RULING: In (a) and (b), the ball remains live. In (c), a traveling violation. In (d), a violation for starting a dribble with the pivot foot off the floor. Since the touching did not prevent the pass or try in (b), (c) and (d), the ball remains live and subsequent action is covered by rules which apply to the situation.

Here is the breakdown of the IAABO members that commented on the video (only two choices): Travel 53% (including me); Legal 47%.

[JRutledge]

Looks like a travel, but could have been knocked slightly out of his hand. Hard to see as there is no clear view.

Peace

[BillyMac]

For IAABO Eyes Only. Below is not a NFHS interpretation, it's only an IAABO International interpretation which obviously doesn't mean a hill of beans to most members of this Forum.

https://storage.googleapis.com/refqu...np1IPHkf5s.mp4

IAABO International Play Commentary: Updated correction. We have updated this play to be a traveling violation. The initial teaching point of this play is the legal recovery of the ball by the airborne player.

However, We should have mentioned; the player does commit a traveling violation after returning to the floor and making a move to the basket to attempt a try. Upon returning to the floor with the ball, he establishes the left foot as the pivot foot. He “spins” toward the basket lifting the left foot and placing it back to the floor before attempting the try. This is a traveling violation.

[Jqb12]

Just to clarify. Player A1 stops the dribble, looks around, is getting some intense pressure. Tosses the ball up at random. Ball hits the floor and bounces back up to him. I understand you cant start a dribble without your pivot foot on the ground.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Jqb12

Just to clarify. Player A1 stops the dribble, looks around, is getting some intense pressure. Tosses the ball up at random. Ball hits the floor and bounces back up to him. I understand you cant start a dribble without your pivot foot on the ground.

Your understanding is (mostly) correct, but nowhere in your description did you indicate that A1 lifted the pivot foot.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Jqb12

Player A1 stops the dribble ... Tosses the ball up ... Ball hits the floor and bounces back up to him. I understand you can't start a dribble without your pivot foot on the ground.

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Your understanding is (mostly) correct, but nowhere in your description did you indicate that A1 lifted the pivot foot.

Jqb12's situation, as described, seems more like an illegal (double) dribble violation than a travel violation. He may be intermingling the two violations, or is not giving us enough information, or is giving us too much information.

9-5 Illegal Dibble: A player must not dribble a second time after his/her first dribble has ended, unless it is after he/she has lost control because of: A try for field goal. A touch by an opponent. A pass or fumble which has then touched, or been touched by, another player.

4-44 Traveling: After coming to a stop and establishing a pivot foot: The pivot foot may not be lifted before the ball is released to start a dribble. After coming to a stop when neither foot can be a pivot: Neither foot may be lifted before the ball is released, to start a dribble.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Jqb12

I understand you can't start a dribble without your pivot foot on the ground.

Be careful here. Jqb12's wording is slightly flip-flopped. Parts of the travel rule assume that a pivot has been established and one has started a dribble with one or both feet on the ground.

In some odd situations one can legally start a dribble before a pivot foot is established. Player jumps into the air and grabs a rebound. While still airborne said player pushes the ball to the floor to legally start dribbling.

Better for Jqb12 to stick to the rulebook language: The pivot foot may not be lifted before the ball is released to start a dribble.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

4-44 Traveling: After coming to a stop and establishing a pivot foot: The pivot foot may not be lifted before the ball is released to start a dribble. After coming to a stop when neither foot can be a pivot: Neither foot may be lifted before the ball is released, to start a dribble.

[Jqb12]

The girl picked up her dribble. Didn't know what to do with the ball. She just tossed it in the air? The ball bounces a few feet from her and then she picked it up. What do we have?