|
|||
I'm old enough (48) to remember when traveling was pretty easy to spot. But these days it seems as if the leniency given in the NBA has filtered down through college and now into high school and beyond. That being said, a couple of questions:
Why isn't that jump-stop move a travel? In the past the player got his 2-1/2 steps and if he landed again he was called for traveling. Now players take their 2-1/2, land on two feet and leave the ground again for a shot and it's legal. What am I missing? While watching the UM/MSU game Wednesday I noticed that when players flash out and catch a pass, they often travel. For example, they'll catch the ball on the left foot, step to their right foot (which IMO establishes the pivot foot) and then step once more to the left foot. I suppose the argument could be made that it has no impact on the play and, therefore, should not be called. But it seems like an old-fashioned travel to me. Does anyone else think enforcement of traveling is not near as tight as it used to be? I even see the extra steps at the middle school level rarely called. Thoughts? |
|
|||
Ahhhhh the lost art of the Travelling violation.
This is probably one of the most missunderstood or missapplied rules in the book. If I see it I call it.
__________________
"Your Azz is the Red Sea, My foot is Moses, and I am about to part the Red Sea all the way up to my knee!" All references/comments are intended for educational purposes. Opinions are free. |
|
|||
Quote:
I think a similar thing occurs when a player comes flying in from the outside for a rebound and grabs the ball while he's still in the air. He often lands one Foot A, then B, then steps with foot A. Also a travel. |
|
|||
Quote:
Coincidentally, that very thing occurred in the UM-MSU game. It happened very quickly so I had to rewind my TiVo to see why it was called. Coach Izzo objected, but I thought it was a great call. |
|
|||
Quote:
|
|
|||
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Whistles & Stripes
Quote:
Can you explain why the jump-stop move isn't a traveling violation? |
|
|||
[QUOTE]Originally posted by kblehman
Quote:
|
|
|||
I think it has to do with defining when the ball is "gathered". If the play is fast enough, it's hard to tell whether the player had both feet on the ground when the ball was actually completely "pulled in" or not, so the ref gives the benefit of the doubt.
|
|
|||
Quote:
Absent the motion, if a player, with the ball, jumps off both feet, one of those feet became a pivot foot when he left the ground. If the player jumps, that player shall not land on either foot before releasing the ball. 4-44-3b mick |
|
|||
Sure. in Fed rules,
Quote:
__________________
Sarchasm: the gulf between the author of sarcastic wit and the recipient. |
|
|||
Quote:
(Note -- iirc, the term is not defined in FED rules, but is in NCAA rules -- using both definitions above.) |
|
|||
Quote:
The jumpstop move seems to allow a player to take his 2 steps and land (on 2 feet) without it being a violation. It seems like a clear travel to me, but that's not how it's usually called. I'm just trying to understand why the 2-steps-then-jumpstop isn't a violation. |
|
|||
Quote:
This happens at full speed, of course. Sometimes I see it in a kind of gestalt way - just see the whole move and recognize it's non-standard nature, and sometimes - when I anticipate that the player will be making the move - I look specifically for the timing of when the ball is picked up.
__________________
Sarchasm: the gulf between the author of sarcastic wit and the recipient. |
Bookmarks |
|
|