Travel?
 

This situation is being kicked around my association right now.....

Men's League game. A1, an extremely athletic guard, makes a strong move from about the top of the key and from about the first lane line after the FT line, jumps into the air...whether to pass or shoot, you can't tell, but he's facing the hoop. While on the way up, he loses the ball himself...i.e., it wasn't stripped, tipped or anything by anyone, he just lost it. Ball, after it hits the floor, is knocked back to half court by a defensive player, and then is recovered by A2.

Some are of the philosophy that this is a travel....i.e., saying that once someone leaves their feet, they must either pass or shoot. If one of those two aren't accomplished, automatic travel. Thoughts? Change the scenario slightly...what if A1 JUMP STOPPED to first lane line, and then went back up and lost it...does that change anything?

It could only be a travel if A1 was the first to touch the ball after he lost it. If any other player touched the loose ball in between, player control ends and the shooter can then recover the ball and do whatever he wants to do- land, dribble,shoot,pass,etc.

See casebook plays 9.5.1 and 9.5.3.

I don't think either case play addresses this situation. In this case, the ball was fumbled by A1. A fumble is not an intentional act and it ends player control. A player can always recover a fumbled ball. No matter who touches it first, it's not traveling.

As Tony says, once player controls ends, that player or anyone else may recover the ball. Once the player loses the ball, there can be no traveling violation on this play. You must have player control to travel. (with the one exception of placing the ball on the floor and then standing up and picking it up.)

Disagree completely. The player that lost(fumbled) the ball was an airborne player, as per the original post. If that player recovered the ball in the air, without another player touching it, and returned to the ground, that player then has travelled imo.

This is another one that we argued before. We disagreed then and we still disagree. Looks like TH has changed his mind since then though.

http://forum.officiating.com/showthread.php?t=25721

And if the airborne player is the first to touch the ball after he returns to the floor, I'm still calling a travel under R4-43-3(b) and case play 4.43.3 SitB too. The airborne player did <b>not</b> release the ball on a pass or a try, and I ain't gonna let him benefit just by dropping the ball.

Not true. My replies are exactly the same. In this play, he did NOT regain possession of the ball and then land. In TMP44's play, the ball hit the floor. Anyone is free to recover it.

So if I'm standing still and fumble the ball, you'll let me go get it. But if I'm ariborne and fumble the ball, I can't go get it? Sorry JR but there's no rule basis for that call. You can't call traveling when there's an unintentional loss of player control. A fumble is an unintentional; loss of player control. It doesn't get anymore baisc than that. You can't call traveling because you don't like the play.

1) OK, we still agree. That means that we both also still disagree with Nevada re: the traveling.

2) Looks like we disagree on that one. R4-43-3(b) doesn't mention a fumble, and imo the purpose and intent of the rule isn't to allow airborne players to benefit from a fumble. It's just placing too much on the calling official's back imo if he has to judge fumble versus deliberate drop on the play.

Both of these would be good ones for Chuck to submit as case plays, if he already hasn't.

You mean, "You shouldn't", not "You can't". Officials make this call frequently. Perhaps you missed the section in the rulebook that says, "I know traveling when I see it." :)

You need to buy a new rule book. Traveling is found under 4-44. :)

BTW, 4-44 says,

Traveling (running with the ball) is moving a foot or feet in any direction in excess of prescribed limits while holding the ball. :p

Nowhere in the rule book does it say "...a player may shoot, pass or fumble the ball..." no matter what situation we're talking about. Why? Because passing and shooting are intentional acts. Fumbling the ball is not.

Yes, JR, we still disagree on the legality of this play.

We do agree that it would have been a great one for Chuck to have submitted as a case book play.
There's always the interps! We may have to get it taken care of there this year.

In case play 4.44.3SitB, hasn't A1 traveled as soon as he touched the dropped ball?

That was my point.

In that play A1 has violated as soon as the dribble is started.

If the ball had been fumbled (accidental slipping from grasp) to the floor instead of dropped (purposeful action), then I believe that the ruling would be that the play is legal.

That is the play I want the NFHS to put into the case book. Replace the word dropped in this play with fumbled.

I submitted the play about recovering the fumble while still airborne; but not the other one.

Yes, he's traveled but the Fed differentiates between dropping the ball (intentionally) and fumbling it (unintentionally). That's why tmp44's play is not like any case book play, as it's a fumble, not an intentional release of the ball.

Yup, one's covered and the other one isn't. I realize that by inference you certainly can make a case for legitimizing the fumble as being legal. I'd like to see a definitive ruling though that covers both situations equally; a ruling that would take some of the "judgement" out of the call- re: fumble vs. deliberate drop. Anything to make the call easier to make and cut down arguments...

Are you sure it isn't?
Under NCAA rules, recovering a fumble is legal. If you think it was not a fumble (unintentional) and the player had already dribbled, then you have a double dribble violation.


As Nevadaref and BktballRef rightly pointed out, you can't commit a travelling violation if you are not holding the ball in your hand(s). Ever.

NCAA 4-66-5

Art. 5. After coming to a stop when neither foot can be the pivot foot:

a. One or both feet may be lifted, but may not be returned to the playing court, before the ball is released on a pass or try for goal;

b. Neither foot shall be lifted, before the ball is released, to start a dribble.

A.R. 39. Is it traveling when a player (a) falls to the playing court while holding the ball; or (b) gains control of the ball while on the playing court and then, because of momentum, rolls or slides, after which the player passes or starts a dribble before getting to his or her feet?

RULING: In (a), yes, because it is virtually impossible not to move the pivot foot when falling to the playing floor. In (b), no. The player may pass, shoot, start a dribble or call a timeout. Once the player has the ball and is no longer sliding, he or she may not roll over. When flat on his or her back, the player may sit up without violating. When the player puts the ball on the floor, then rises and is the first to touch the ball, it also is traveling. When a player rises to his or her feet while holding the ball, it is traveling. When a player falls to one knee while holding the ball, it is traveling if the pivot foot moves.

This new learning about American rules amazes me, indeed, but that's not the case we were talking about, is it?
Anyway, the player commits a traveling violation the moment he touches the ball, which does not wholly contradict what I was saying earlier (even if "touching" is not exactly the same as "holding").

1) Can you cite an NCAA rule or AR that will back up that statement?

2) Ever?:confused: DanRef just cited an NCAA rule that shows how a player can be called for traveling without holding the ball. The comparable NFHS cite is case book play 4.44.5SitB. In that case play, you can also have traveling without holding the ball, as the other case that I cited before- 4.44.3SitB- states also. Thart's 3 situations right out of the rule books showing situations where traveling can be called on a player for something that he did while <b>not</b> holding the ball.

"Section 66. Traveling
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."
(by the way, why is "travelling" misspelt there? :D )

Sure, but it rather seems a quite specifical situation, an exception, so to speak. Maybe a rule that was introduced following some kind of strange play. Anyway, the player in that case has control of the ball. A player who fumbles does not.

In the case of a fumble, the only violation you can possibly call is a double dribble. (NCAA 9-7-1, but also see 4-29-2)

This may also be interesting (from NCAA rulebook):
"A.R. 38. A1 attempts to catch the ball while running. A1 fumbles the ball and succeeds in securing it before it strikes the playing court. A1 then begins a dribble, taking several steps between the time A1 first touched the ball until catching it. RULING: There has been no violation provided that A1 released the ball to start the dribble before lifting the pivot foot from the playing court after catching the ball."

NCAA rule 4-66- 4(b)-<b>TRAVELING</b> states "After coming to a stop and establishing a pivot foot, the pivot foot shall not be lifted before the ball is released to start a dribble". If a player does so, such as an airborne player who has dropped the ball after jumping, then that player has committed a <b>traveling</b> violation when he touches the ball again, <b>not</b> a double dribble violation as you stated in another post.

Both NCAA and NFHS rules are clear about an airborne player deliberately dropping the ball. What isn't as clear is whether that also applies to an airborne player that fumbles the ball and then subsequently recovers it.

The case play that you cited at the bottom of your last post isn't relative in any way. Apples and oranges....and different rules covering the apples and oranges.

Yes, but the traveling violation occurred when he lifted the pivot foot while still having the ball in his hands.
The official will want to wait in order to see whether the player passes the ball or actually dribbles, but the violation had already occurred.

Also, 4-18-3 reminds us that:
"the ball may be batted into the air, provided that it is permitted to strike the playing court one or more times before the ball is touched again with either hand." (which would be a double dribble violation, not travelling).

Anyway, I was thinking it's funny because we both agree it is a violation (it is also under FIBA rules, which I am more familiar with) and would call it.
Still, we don't agree about which kind of violation it is :)

:confused:

No, the violation hasn't already occurred. There's no violation when the player jumps in the air and passes, shoots or calls a TO, or even if the player deliberately drops the ball while being airborne. The traveling violation occurs when the airborne player lands and then is the first player to touch the ball.

That's definitely NOT what I said. In fact, I went out of my way to specify that there was one exception, if you had read my post that was made almost 12 hours prior to your's! :)

I understand.

let's sum up, then:

1) Player jumps, drops the ball and recovers it. ---> Travelling
2) Player jumps, fumbles, then recovers the fumble. ---> Legal play

Right?

No.

Agree with #1 if it's a deliberate drop.

In #2, if the player recovers the fumble in mid-air and then comes down with the ball, it's traveling. If the airborne player recovers the fumble after coming down, it may or may not be traveling.

I agree with that.

I disagree with JR on his ruling on #2. Player control ended and then started again. This player is now that same as a player who jumped without the ball and caught it while airborne. He may land.

That's my opinion.

This would make a good Exam question.