Who would have called a traveling violation?

[bucky]

Who would have called a traveling violation on the shooter?


https://youtu.be/t-otVaxBSK8

[BillyMac]

Looks like left foot is, and stays, the pivot foot.

Nice video. Thanks.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

I watched the video while standing 12 inches away from my 66 inch HD flat screen television because it gave me a clear view of W3's Feet touching the Floor:

1) W3 caught the Ball while being an Airborne Player.

2) W3's Right Foot Touched the Floor first which became his Pivot Foot, thereby making his Left Foot his Non-Pivot Foot.

3) W3's, while his Pivot Foot was still in Contact with the Floor, his Non-Pivot Foot Touched the Floor.

4a) While W3's Non-Pivot Foot was in Contact with the Floor, he lifted his Pivot Foot and then returned it too the Floor.

4b) When W3's Pivot Foot returned to the Floor, W3 committed and Traveling Violation.

4c) The T, In Real Time, should have been able to see the order in which W3's Feet returned to the Floor.

5) Would I have called a Traveling Violation in a New York Minute every day of the week and twice on Sunday.

6a) There is a saying: "Call the Obvious!"

6b) Call the Traveling Violation and there would have been no drama!

MTD, Sr.

[bucky]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Looks like left foot is, and stays, the pivot foot.

Nice video. Thanks.

You may want to reconsider, possibly after watching it in slow motion. Or, just read Mark's post.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

1) W3 caught the Ball while being an Airborne Player.

2) W3's Right Foot Touched the Floor first which became his Pivot Foot, thereby making his Left Foot his Non-Pivot Foot.

3) W3's, while his Pivot RIGHT Foot was still in Contact with the Floor, his Non-Pivot LEFT Foot Touched the Floor.

This is the point at which the player established his pivot foot. Unless the rule has changed in the last two years, technically (admittedly, VERY technically), the player did not have a pivot foot until the left foot touched the floor. (This is why the jump stop is legal.)

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by bucky

You may want to reconsider, possibly after watching it in slow motion. Or, just read Mark's post.

I was incorrect about the which foot was the pivot foot, but I stil beleive that this was legal.

We've been told that if we are unsure, to not sound the whistle

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by bucky

You may want to reconsider, possibly after watching it in slow motion. Or, just read Mark's post.

If I have to watch something in slow motion to be sure, I am not calling a traveling violation. Not a good way to officiate, because then now we will dissect every foot movement and travels we have called if that play is a travel.

Peace

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

This is the point at which the player established his pivot foot. Unless the rule has changed in the last two years, technically (admittedly, VERY technically), the player did not have a pivot foot until the left foot touched the floor. (This is why the jump stop is legal.)

Scrapper1:

My analysis was based only on what happened in the video. When W3 did not perform a Jump Stop, my description was completely accurate.

MTD, Sr

[bucky]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

If I have to watch something in slow motion to be sure, I am not calling a traveling violation. Not a good way to officiate, because then now we will dissect every foot movement and travels we have called if that play is a travel.

Peace

One didn't have to watch it in slow-motion, thus the word "possibly". The travel seemed fairly obvious to me, which was my point. Officials allow this all the time and, again to me, it get old. I don't think anyone would have called a travel in this type of huge game at a huge moment. Can you imagine if it was called, the basket was still made, and then wiped off? I think that might have resulted in a situation worse than what actually happened. People threw items at the crew and the the Auburn coach came unglued.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by bucky

One didn't have to watch it in slow-motion, thus the word "possibly". The travel seemed fairly obvious to me, which was my point. Officials allow this all the time and, again to me, it get old. I don't think anyone would have called a travel in this type of huge game at a huge moment. Can you imagine if it was called, the basket was still made, and then wiped off? I think that might have resulted in a situation worse than what actually happened. People threw items at the crew and the the Auburn coach came unglued.

Keep in mind, I am not talking about you, but others might have to do so and others might debate over how obvious this call is. Not saying what anyone should call, but if you make that call you will have to likely be scrutinized the same way the officials were for how they concluded the basket should not count.

SEC Two Minute Review

Peace