Jump stop

[blindzebra]

Originally Posted by Ref in PA

At the risk of taking heat ...

It could be that different areas of the country have different definitions for the jump stop.

In my area, the NFHS definition of the Jump Stop is jumping off one foot and landing on two. That is the only context around which I have received training concerning the jump stop. I accept and understand that other areas of the country refer to the jump stop as landing on two feet.

Coach P is correct - the NFHS rule book does not define what a jump stop is specifically. And BZ, since when to we use Google to define basketball terms? We usually defer to the rule book and if it is not specifically defined therein, we accept that. The NCAA may have defined the jump stop specifically, but again, rules and simple nuances have been known to differ between the NCAA and the NFHS.

What is important is to refer to the current rule set for the game to know what is allowed and what is not allowed after getting possession of the ball.

Okay, look at it this way...why would landing simultaneously on both feet be called something different if you did it coming off one foot, or off no feet? You landed that way for the exact same reason...to be in a position of balance and in a position to be a threat.

The term itself has absolutely NOTHING to do with whether you have a travel or not, a pivot foot or not...knowing the status of their feet BEFORE they make this jump and landing is the key.

Not understanding that is the issue, not the use of the term "jump stop."

[blindzebra]

Originally Posted by just another ref

I was looking for use of the term jump stop, which is not here, even though apparently one (or more) of these is/are considered to be the definition(s) of the term.

Care to explain why it matters that the term is there?

Care to explain why a one foot to two feet landing is different than a no feet to two feet landing and thus needs a different term?

Care to explain why the term jump stop has anything to do with the travel rules?

[Jurassic Referee]

Care to explain whatinthehell difference it really makes whatever they call it?

Forget about a damn "jump stop" and learn rule 4-44-2. That make the usage of the terminology "jump stop" irrelevant.

Lah me......

Originally Posted by just another ref

I was looking for use of the term jump stop, which is not here

That's equivalent to looking for the term over the back or a reaching foul in the rule book. No such thing will be found, but one still has to know the rules regardless of the terminology.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by blindzebra

Care to explain why it matters that the term is there?

Only to clarify that there is no "rulebook" definition of the term. Therefore neither my definition nor yours can be considered totally wrong. I thought my interpretation, which was seconded by ref in Pa, was the one recognized by "everybody." (or at least the vast majority) If this is not the case I stand corrected.

Care to explain why a one foot to two feet landing is different than a no feet to two feet landing and thus needs a different term?

You can pivot after one but not the other.

Care to explain why the term jump stop has anything to do with the travel rules?

Because players soooooo often are guilty of a traveling violation when they perform what they consider to be a "legal jump stop." I actually think we would be better off if the term would disappear, along with others we could name.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Ch1town

That's equivalent to looking for the term over the back or a reaching foul in the rule book. No such thing will be found, but one still has to know the rules regardless of the terminology.

This was my point. You would not quote rule 10-whatever to define these terms. You would simply point out that theses terms are not in the book, even though we may know what a coach is asking for when he yells out the words.

Originally Posted by just another ref

You would simply point out that theses terms are not in the book, even though we may know what a coach is asking for when he yells out the words.

I recently had a partner that used your way of thinking during games, "never heard of that coach" was his reply to the made up terminology... boy did it made for a long 4 game set. Instead of working with the coach, he choose to be smarter than he needed to be.

Of course "over the back" is nowhere to be found in the rulebook, but we all know exactly what the coach means. A simple no push or no contact there coach would do just fine.

Same for a "jump stop" when the coach wants the travel... legal movement, no violation there coach is suffice.

Rules knowledge, game management & common sense go a long way.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Ch1town

I recently had a partner that used your way of thinking during games, "never heard of that coach" was his reply to the made up terminology... boy did it made for a long 4 game set. Instead of working with the coach, he choose to be smarter than he needed to be.

I didn't mean to use this when speaking to a coach. As we have all noticed by now discussions on this forum get, uh, feisty sometimes over (mis)use of different terminology. Along these lines, my question was always why do officials make such a big deal about a coach screaming "over the back" but not "walking"?

[blindzebra]

There is a huge difference between rule myths and the usage of terms like reaching in and over the back, and using ACTUAL basketball terms like jump stop, ball fake, jab step, etc.

If a sentence like, "He never lifted his pivot foot coach, that was all one foot," can be replaced by, "That's a jab step coach." How does that hurt?

The key is to know the rules and be able to best communicate what was or wasn't called and why, in as concise a manner as possible.

Seems there are as many "plumbers" on this forum as I see on the court.

Why make things harder than they need to be?

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by blindzebra

"That's a jab step coach."

Not sure what a jab step is either. Not likely to knock anyone out, but may help you to win a decision?


Seriously, this has been largely a discussion about nothing, which is largely my fault. The important thing is rules knowledge and careful use of terms, whether they are in the book or not. I, personally, will try to refrain from using the term jump stop at all in the future.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Says who?




;

NCAA 4-42 Jump Stop

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by Ref in PA

In my area, the NFHS definition of the Jump Stop is jumping off one foot and landing on two.

That's no different than what's been said here. Why can't you guys get that through your head?

A dribbler jumps off one foot and lands on two feet. That's a JUMP STOP.

If he ends his dribble with his foot on the floor, he cannot pivot.

If he ends the dribble after he jumps, he can pivot.

But both are JUMP STOPS.

But according to you guys, if a player jumps, ends his dribble while airborne and then lands with both feet simultaneously, it's not a jump stop.

If it's not a jump stop, what the hell is it?

[rainmaker]

The easiest thing to say to a coach is "It was indeed a jump stop, but it was the illegal version." Or some such. "Yes, but it wasn't a legal jump stop." That takes the argument away from the terminology, and gets to the heart of the rule, which most coaches don't understand. As BBR said, it matters only WHEN the ball was gathered (or the dribble ended), NOT what the name of the maneuver is.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by rainmaker

The easiest thing to say to a coach is "It was indeed a jump stop, but it was the illegal version."

Nope, the two easiest things to say imo are:
1) Coach, that's traveling.
2) Coach, that isn't traveling.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Nope, the two easiest things to say imo are:
1) Coach, that's traveling.
2) Coach, that isn't traveling.

I agree with this response. Trying to explain much else is usually useless to a coach.

Peace