I have a nomination for a POE ... the Jump Stop ... while watching umteen games this weekend, I noticed the somewhat lax enforcement of the "simultaneous landing" portion of the rule.

I know if it is close to simultaneous we let it go. At the D1 level, it is getting to be a common move ... 1 through 5 are using the move with regularity and it seems to me that it is gettng a little sloppier as time goes on ... beginning to resemble the NBA.

The jump stop moves from D1 will trickle down to HS is no time, so we should nip it in the bud.

Anyone else notice this or am I just being a prude?

rpwall,
I don't think we, as officials, need the POE to make the correct judgement. Yes, the jump stop looks sloppy at times. Yes, the jump stop may be allowed if it is close.
Yet, it's our job to make it allowed when it is legal.
Adding a few paragraphs in the book, or not, shouldn't be the guiding lines as to whether we will call the action rightly, or wrongly.
mick

Rightly or wrongly?? :)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by mick

Quote:

rpwall, I don't think we, as officials, need the POE to make the correct judgement. Yes, the jump stop looks sloppy at times. Yes, the jump stop may be allowed if it is close. Yet, it's our job to make it allowed when it is legal. Adding a few paragraphs in the book, or not, shouldn't be the guiding lines as to whether we will call the action rightly, or wrongly. mick

I agree that certain parts of the rulebook should not have to be emphasized ... but .. the fact is that there is no ambuguity in the rulebook about handchecking or rough post-play but we still have POE's in those areas. POE's seem to come to life when officials allow some things to go to the point where the game takes on a dimension (e.g., physical play) not envisioned by the keepers-of-the-rules.

I think the jump stop fits into that category ... to begin with, it is a contrivance that has to be specifically defined in the rules as being legal ... otherwise, IMHO it would be a travel ... and if the enforcement of it is lax, then we have stretched something that is a stretch of pivot foot restrictions in the first place.

Wouldn't you agree that it's not just the jump stop
but the entire travel rule that could be more strictly
enforced? The thing I'm seeing more & more of these days
is the travel by the low post player as he takes 2 steps
before the big slam down.

Good point!
 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by rpwall

Quote:

Originally posted by mick Quote: rpwall, I don't think we, as officials, need the POE to make the correct judgement. Yes, the jump stop looks sloppy at times. Yes, the jump stop may be allowed if it is close. Yet, it's our job to make it allowed when it is legal. Adding a few paragraphs in the book, or not, shouldn't be the guiding lines as to whether we will call the action rightly, or wrongly. mick I agree that certain parts of the rulebook should not have to be emphasized ... but .. the fact is that there is no ambuguity in the rulebook about handchecking or rough post-play but we still have POE's in those areas. POE's seem to come to life when officials allow some things to go to the point where the game takes on a dimension (e.g., physical play) not envisioned by the keepers-of-the-rules. I think the jump stop fits into that category ... to begin with, it is a contrivance that has to be specifically defined in the rules as being legal ... otherwise, IMHO it would be a travel ... and if the enforcement of it is lax, then we have stretched something that is a stretch of pivot foot restrictions in the first place.

rpwall,
I like your thoughts about dimension, contrivance and stretching interpretations. I think you're right on.
And yet, the only officials that will even bother with the POE are the one's that probably call it correctly without the POE.
Will the Coaches read 'em? Will the lazy officials read 'em?
Do they even know they are there? :)
mick

Oops.
 

Tony,
Should I have said rightly, or rightly?
mick

Re: Oops.
 

I was thinking correctly or incorrectly. Not sure that I've ever heard rightly and wrongly used in the same sentence. Must be something youz guyz do U.P. there! :)

I agree with Dan, on this issue at least. :) I'm tired of seeing players with their back to the basket, take two steps without putting the ball on the floor or the guard who makes an incredible spin move but is actually traveling. Those two travels are the only reason I still call the game! ;)

You mean the travel rule isn't three steps?

Damn, we've been misleading those geniuses on the sidelines and in the stands for years! :)

I'd like to put my two cents worth in on a related subject.
The practice of catching the ball with a step and then pivoting on the opposite foot. I've sceene it happen on many occasions watching Varsity ball but it is seldom called. I call it when I see it and take a lot of flack because of it.
Comments welcome!

Actually I would like to do away with POE's. We are damned if we call them and damned if we don't.

I'm with Dan and rpwall on this one. We are way too loose on travelling, in my opinion. I can't believe how often the fast-break-er picks up the dribble way too soon and is allowed, every time. When I do call it, I get so much flack, it is quite astonishing. I talked to a woman in our association about it during our girls' tournament this year, and she said that yes we are too loose, and she doesn't agree with it either, but if you don't conform to "common practice" you lose all your credibility and can;t do the best possible job. I don't like the way "common practice" is used by the HMO's, and I don't like it in this context, either. But what's to be done?