Uhhmmm....

[canuckrefguy]

A very good NCAA official once said at a camp....

"Ensure all your errors are errors of omission...."

[jbduke]

I rarely criticize Raftery, but here's one. None of the replays was shown at-regular-speed-with-sound. Raf can count steps all he wants, but it means nothing without hearing when the whistle came. And the whistle came long before he got to three in his one-two-three.

When looking at this situation, you have to take into account the time and score. In that situation, you have to be sure. You have to be sure. And when you have to slow it down and review it several times, you cannot have been sure enough to blow.

I agree with Tony one hundred percent: he anticipated something that never came.

Great game. Congratulations to UNC on a very hard-earned victory, and to Villanova for the gamest of efforts.

[Snake~eyes]

Originally posted by blindzebra

Why is the lead watching a drive that started BEHIND the 3 point line? All Tom should have on that is the help defender, that's trail's call.

You act like we haven't discussed officials calling out of their primary in the tourney....

[Jimgolf]

The number of steps taken is irrelevant,

The key is which foot is the pivot foot when the dribble ends. He landed left-right at the end of his dribble. This makes the left foot his pivot foot. Once he lifted his left foot, he had to shoot before his left foot touched the ground again. When his left foot touched the ground, it became a traveling violation.

[rulesmaven]

Originally posted by Jimgolf
The number of steps taken is irrelevant,

The key is which foot is the pivot foot when the dribble ends. He landed left-right at the end of his dribble. This makes the left foot his pivot foot. Once he lifted his left foot, he had to shoot before his left foot touched the ground again. When his left foot touched the ground, it became a traveling violation.

Isn't it just two ways of asking the same question? The question is whether his dribble ended before his left foot cleared the ground, in which case the right foot was the pivot and it wasn't a travel unless and until the right foot returned to the ground. Looks like the left foot was clear before the dribble ended, but it's not absolutely clear on the replay because you can't see his left hand.

[rainmaker]

Originally posted by rulesmaven
The question is whether his dribble ended before his left foot cleared the ground...

Right! When was the ball held? If there was a travel at this point in the play, it shouldn't have been called at this point in the game, since it hasn't been called in the last six weeks.

If there was a travel at all, (and I defer to Dan's infinitely more authoritative opinion that there wasn't) it would have been on the spin move before the dribble. But the whistle didn't come till the ball had left the hands on the shot, so that would be really, really late.

I think that either the ref had been working his kid's soccer game earlier in the week and he was holding his travel call to see if there was an advantage, or he did as Tony (whose authority I also defer to) suggested and anticipated the call. In other words, he blew it.

[blindzebra]

Originally posted by Jimgolf
The number of steps taken is irrelevant,

The key is which foot is the pivot foot when the dribble ends. He landed left-right at the end of his dribble. This makes the left foot his pivot foot. Once he lifted his left foot, he had to shoot before his left foot touched the ground again. When his left foot touched the ground, it became a traveling violation.

He landed right-left, not left-right-left. It was VERY close, but both feet were off the floor when he gathered...Tivo is a wonderful thing...

[JRutledge]

It appears that the travel was near the lane, not at the 3 point line. From what they showed, I think it was a travel because the dribbler picked up the ball and established the left foot as his pivot foot. He then put down his pivot foot, got his feet together and shot the ball. If that was what was called, it was the proper call. And according to CBS, Hank Nichols said the call was right. Gumbel and his other pundits said the call was missed, even when they broke down the call in slow motion. The problem is that they have no understanding of the rule. Craig Kellogg used the 1 and 1/2 steps to describe what is allowed. I just want to know what 1 and 1/2 steps is?

I think one of the problems is that is not a travel called enough and most people would not call it regardless of the time of the game.

Peace

[rainmaker]

Originally posted by JRutledge
Craig Kellogg used the 1 and 1/2 steps to describe what is allowed. I just want to know what 1 and 1/2 steps is?

Sheez, Jeff, these guys can't even define "paradigm" and "holistic" and you want them to understand a concept as complicated as a "step"? I think you and I both know that if they were that smart (as smart as us!), they'd be doing something else.

[BktBallRef]

Originally posted by blindzebra

He landed right-left, not left-right-left. It was VERY close, but both feet were off the floor when he gathered...Tivo is a wonderful thing...

I've looked at it a number of times. One could argue that he ended the dribble with his left foot on the floor, stepped right, stepped left. That's traveling.

CBS even analyzed again today, pointed out that he took two steps after gathering the ball but said that wasn't traveling.

[blindzebra]

Originally posted by BktBallRef

I've looked at it a number of times. One could argue that he ended the dribble with his left foot on the floor, stepped right, stepped left. That's traveling.

CBS even analyzed again today, pointed out that he took two steps after gathering the ball but said that wasn't traveling.

Like I said it was close. Too close to call it in that situation, especially when you have the defender and the dribbler between you and the ball and it should be trail's call any way. Trail was looking right at it and passed.

[rulesmaven]

I think Nichols explanation was that he gathered while the left foot was still on the floor. If that's not the basis for the call, I'm really not seeing any other coceivable basis. If the left foot was clear of the floor when the dribble stopped, I can't see any problem with the play, because he surely shot before the right foot returned to the floor.

One interesting thing to note is that Scott -- the defender who had been guarding Ray out near the sideline/three point line immediately assumed he had been called for the foul and ran over to the spot to say that it was on the floor. I did think Scott fouled him out there, and Scott has admitted as much. But the shot they showed on CBS today looks pretty clear that McCants didn't touch him once he got in the lane.

I hate to say it, but it really is hard to conclude anything other than that O'Neill anticipated contact in the lane.

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by rulesmaven
I think Nichols explanation was that he gathered while the left foot was still on the floor. If that's not the basis for the call, I'm really not seeing any other coceivable basis. If the left foot was clear of the floor when the dribble stopped, I can't see any problem with the play, because he surely shot before the right foot returned to the floor.

One interesting thing to note is that Scott -- the defender who had been guarding Ray out near the sideline/three point line immediately assumed he had been called for the foul and ran over to the spot to say that it was on the floor. I did think Scott fouled him out there, and Scott has admitted as much. But the shot they showed on CBS today looks pretty clear that McCants didn't touch him once he got in the lane.

I hate to say it, but it really is hard to conclude anything other than that O'Neill anticipated contact in the lane.

What I heard on CBS is that Nichols said IF the official judged the left foot was the pivot then the travel was the correct call. If.

I did not hear that Nichols said it was absolutely the correct call.

I'm looking for the statement but I can't find it. If you have a link can you post it and we can put this this to an end.

[canuckrefguy]

It's great for us to play it back and forth on TIVO, in slo-mo, and at regular speed - to dissect whether he gathered on or off the floor - whether he landed L-R or R-L or 2-foot - whatever.

It's almost 24 hours later, and still no absolutely definitive answer....this adds evidence to the argument that this should NOT have been called.

Bottom line....you can no-call that a million times and nobody would care. Roy Williams and the UNC fans would not have been freaking out, asking for a walk, the analysts would not have been picking it apart, frame-by-frame, and Mr. Nichols would not have been required to respond publicly in any way, shape, or form.

There were likely 25 other instances earlier in the game that were in the same category as the "travel" call - but were passed on.

Like that very good NCAA ref (who's done 11 final fours) said, "errors of omission"...

[Nevadaref]

Originally posted by blindzebra

Like I said it was close. Too close to call it in that situation, especially when you have the defender and the dribbler between you and the ball and it should be trail's call any way. Trail was looking right at it and passed.

Since I haven't made a comment on this play yet, I'll chime in now. All of the above comments are excellent. I have the game on video tape and have watched the play in slow-motion several times.
I believe that the left foot was still on the floor when the dribble ended. That makes it the pivot foot when the right foot touches in a step. The Villanova player now stepped with his right foot and then his left before going up to shoot. That's a travel and I say that the official got it right.

I also agree that it was super close. Afterall, I had a difficult time making the determination in super slow-mo! In live action, from the Lead, with players in front of me, I doubt that I make that call.
I feel that the official called it based upon the awkwardness of how the play looked. It just happened too fast for me to believe otherwise.