I am wondering why NCAA neglects it too.

Thanks for letting me know I am not alone in this.

This is incorrect.

Also D is incorrect.

I'm not sure you caught this yet but from your original post part 1 is NOT a travel, as is described in later replies in the thread.

Part D is definitely a travel, as mick said, I'm wondering how this could actually happen, seems very awkward to me.

which one?

Quote:

Also D is incorrect.

I know D is a controversial one to say the least. To some, D may even seem ridiculous. But I will argue that, in essence, there is no difference between D and C.

To claim both C and D are legal, I uses NCAA 4-66-3(a-3):

a. When both feet are off the playing court and the player lands:
3. On one foot, the player may jump off that foot and <U>simultaneously land on both</U>; neither foot can be the pivot foot.

and NCAA-66-5(a):

Art. 5. After coming to a stop when neither foot can be the pivot foot:
a. <U>One or both feet may be lifted</U>, but may not be returned to the playing court, before the ball is released on a pass or try for goal;

So if a player is allowed to land with <U>both feet</U>, he is certainly allowed to land with one foot only, provided that the other foot does not do anything funny.

Also if a player is allowed to jump when <U>both feet</U> on the floor, he is certainly allowed to jump when one foot on the floor, provided that the other foot behaves.

the key here is "to simultaneously land on both feet" only prohibits "to land one foot after the other", does not prohibits "to land on one foot only" at all, as long as the other foot does not land until the ball is gone.

This is what I truely believe, D is just as legal as C. Also I believe it is well within basketball game principle, unlike my other "one jump with the ball after pivoting" scenairo.

(Actually I missed the 5th way of legal lay-ups: the land-step-jump-shoot sequence, which is very similar to C, only the player steps first before the jump and shot.)

Do I miss anything here?

Thanks.

I believe both cases in my original post are travel. For part 1, NFHS 4-43-3(b) indicates that. Maybe you read the post too quick or my English played a trick on you. :)

Part D is very awkward to many. but it is in the repertoire of few less skilled players who have not mastered the left-hand layups. when the player lands on the "wrong" foot after catching a pass, he has to hop on this foot again to jump off it, because this is his "favorite" foot for layups.

Thanks.

ysong,

C)gets the ball when both feet off the floor, then <B><font color = red>foot #1 back to floor</font>, <font color = green>foot #1 off the floor</font></B>, foot #2 back to floor, foot #2 off the floor, ball gone, foot(feet) back to floor. This is the land-jump-jump-shoot sequence, with alternate "footings".


D)gets the ball when both feet off the floor, then <B><Font color = red>foot #1 back to floor</font>, <Font color = green>foot #1 off the floor</font>, <Font color = red>foot #1 back to floor again</font></B><font color = blue>(!)</font></B>, foot #1 off the floor, ball gone, foot (feet) back to the floor. this is the land-jump-jump-shoot sequence, with the same footing.

Um, nope.
One red + one green does not equal two red + one green. ;)
mick

That is why I said "<U>in essence</U>" they were the same. :)

in stead of landing simultaneously on both feet, the player lands on one foot only, then jumps right off to shoot. In this regard, C and D are the same.

Actually, C is not listed in the "prescribed limit" in NCAA either, right? But no one really questions C's legitimacy.

So what makes C a legal move in NCAA? Why can't it apply to D also?

Thanks.

I don't have my rulebook with me and since I can't look the rules up on the internet I don't have anything to back myself up. But I am sure this act is legal:

A player has an established pivot, which your situation does, lifts the pivot foot (other foot on the floor or not), lands on the other foot (or other foot is already on the floor), jumps off the other foot and passes or shoots (dribbling in this situation is a violation).

Also think about a jump shot, how would your situation be a travel and a jump shot not? A jump shot has the same basic things happening, pivot foot leaving floor etc.

If we're describing a different situation please tell me, but from my interpretation it the same.

For part D, to me it seems a little different but the same rule would apply, but in this case the pivot foot was lifted and returned to the floor, disregarding whether or not the other foot touched the floor, would make part D a travel.

If I'm wrong, someone please tell me.

Thanks

NFHS 4-43-3(b) is:
. After coming to a stop and establishing a pivot foot:
b. If the player jumps, <U>neither foot</U> may be returned to the floor before the ball is released on a pass or try for goal.

so in a jump shot, both feet are lifted, but Neither foot is returned to the floor until ball is gone. So jump shoot is perfectly legal.

But in the "part 1 move", at the moment when both feet are off the floor, it becomes a jump. when the non-pivot foot back down before the ball is gone, it directly violates the above rule.

Quote:

For part D, to me it seems a little different but the same rule would apply, but in this case the pivot foot was lifted and returned to the floor, disregarding whether or not the other foot touched the floor, would make part D a travel.

As I quoted in my previous post, NCAA 4-66 allows 2-beat jump stop while moving. on the second beat, the pivot foot does return to the floor, but it is still legal. It is an exception to the traditional wisdom "pivot foot can not back down".

Thanks.

OK, how about this:
2 on 1 break, A1 passes to A2 who catches the ball in midair, lands on left foot which is now the pivot, lifts (jumps, steps, leg falls off below the knee, etc.) left foot, right foot lands, jumps of right foot for a layup.

Legal

Same thing, 2 on 1 break, A1 passes to A2 who catches the ball with left foot already on floor. Same thing happens, lifts left foot, right foot lands, jumps of right, layup.

Legal

The same rule is applied to both situations, just a different situation which in fact the exact same thing happens.

I disagree with much of this. When I read "to simultaneously land on both feet," I read this as only covering the case where the player simultaneously lands on both feet. It does not (to my reading) say anything about a player landing on one foot. The key is the first provision of 4-66:

Art. 1.Traveling occurs when a player holding the ball moves a foot or both feet in any direction in excess of prescribed limits described in this Rule.

situation D that you described above (basically a hop---a jump stop, but landing on one foot instead of both feet) is a travel.

Have a nice day. :)
mick

No doubt, both cases are legal.

As you can see, in both 2 cases, the player is moving when he catches the ball. In my "part 1 move", the player is not moving. this difference makes The 43-3(b) apply to my case but not yours. because 43-3(b) requires player "come to stop" first in order for this rule to apply.

Thanks.

I believe you have no problems with C, right? So what makes C a legal move? :)

Thanks.

With a quick look I couldn't locate rule 43-3(b) assuming you are referencing NCAA rules.

I did find rule 4-66, article 4(a) which is:
Art. 4. After coming to a stop and establishing the pivot foot:
a. The pivot foot may be lifted, but not returned to the playing court, before the ball is released on a pass or try for goal

This would make your original part 1 legal. I will find something in the FED rule and case book this weekend and report back Monday.

I'm done, going home, here comes the weekend :)