Traveling philosophies....

[zebraman]

So I'm working a men's college summer league. Mostly D-2 and D-3 teams. Some D-1 refs observe the games and give some input to the officials after the game (the games are being reffed by men's CC and D-3 officials).

I'm watching the game before mine. A player does the "replant" move before shooting a 3-pointer in transition (the replant was supposed to be a big point of emphasis around here in college games last season - meaning the player catches the ball with both feet on the ground and then does the little hop and lands on both feet again before shooting). Of course, the 3-pointer goes in and the official has to wave off the basket because of the travel violation. At halftime, I listen in to the D-1 ref/observer as he tells the official that he is "ruining the game" and to only call travels that are obvious to everyone in the gym. OK, point taken. I don't guess on travels anyway, but I will adjust and not call one unless it's obvious to even a novice fan. The D-1 ref/observer who made the comment is an absolute stud with more than one men's final four game on his resume.

In my game, I am at the C position right before the end of the half. A drive comes out of the T's area and goes at the hoop right down the middle of the key. A1 loses control of the ball and bobbles it as he takes about 3 steps before throwing up an off-balance shot. The T has no call. I don't have a call either and the horn sounds to end the half. Of course, there were about 10 fans who were whining because no travel was called but what do they know? So our D-1 ref/observer comes out (another guy that I have huge respect for) and looks at the T and says, "why didn't you call a travel?" He says, "the player was bobbling the ball and did not have control." The observer says, "call the travel." "Just make it easy on yourself and call the travel in that case. Nobody will say a word if you do."

Now I totally understand where those philosophies come from. They come from the assignors that those two refs work for. If you are going to stick around, you darn well better call what your assignor wants. No problem, I can do that. Those two D-1 refs are at the highest levels and can adjust to call the game anyway they are asked.

However, when I look at the "big picture" of basketball, I really think these kinds of philosophies hurt the game overall. Just my two cents. Interested in hearing other thoughts.

[Boiler14]

The first travel you described pains me to see. I have to admit letting it go a lot more times than I've called it. Of course when I do call it, it always come with grief from coaches and fans. An explanation of what I saw never is satisfying. Why? Because it is not called very often.

The "no control" travel is one that I understand the logic, but it isn't right either. If we want to stay out of trouble when entering a gym we should buy a ticket instead officiating. If I'm in front of the coach and he wants travel I just give a quick football mechanic (I know...it isn't really a football mechanic either) with my hands that says no control.

However, if someone higher up is telling me how to call such plays, I will try to abide by their wishes.

[Back In The Saddle]

Are they hurting the game? What exactly IS the game? Padgett is asking in another thread whether HS and NCAA rules be the same The practical answer is, it wouldn't matter. The rules aren't what are in the book. The rules are whatever the assigner and the big dogs say they are. As much as we'd all like to think that what's in the book is absolute, this little anecdote reminds us that it just isn't.

Are they hurting the game? That's a great philosophical question. But the reality is they are defining the game.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Back In The Saddle

Are they hurting the game? That's a great philosophical question. But the reality is they are defining the game.

The reality is that they're turning the game into the NBA, which sureashell isn't a good thing. Coaches, players, fans and even us officials don't know what's going to be called on any particular play. There's no uniformity in rules-calling because they aren't calling by the rules. It's just plain wrong imo.

What constantly amazes me is that some big dawgs refuse to follow some very explicit NCAA directives and POE's. The sad part is that they do so while other big dawgs are.

[JRutledge]

Whether we like it or not, officiating is a very subjective thing. All we have here are two officials that disagree on what needs to be called or how to navigate the game. Welcome to the real world because that happens on a daily basis at every camp I have ever attended. You can show a single play only to have different opinions as to what a call should have been or how the rule should be applied. This is just another example of how officials see different things. I do not think their comments are representative of anything other than their opinions. And without seeing the plays, it is hard to tell if there really is any merit to what was told. After all traveling is a judgment call. This is why this is the most inconsistent rule applied at all levels.

BTW JR, I see a lot of travel calls made at the NBA level. I have watched five minutes of some games and seen 3 straight trips with a travel call. It is just a call that is not called very consistently at all levels.

Peace

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

1) Whether we like it or not, officiating is a very subjective thing. All we have here are two officials that disagree on what needs to be called or how to navigate the game. Welcome to the real world because that happens on a daily basis at every camp I have ever attended. You can show a single play only to have different opinions as to what a call should have been or how the rule should be applied. This is just another example of how officials see different things. I do not think their comments are representative of anything other than their opinions.

2) BTW JR, I see a lot of travel calls made at the NBA level. I have watched five minutes of some games and seen 3 straight trips with a travel call. It is just a call that is not called very consistently at all levels.

1) A good example supporting what you're saying might be Tim Donaghy. From what I've read, the great majority of his calls were subjectively judged by NBA observers as being correct and proper. He was rated above average in calling accuracy. Now, they're re-reviewing all of his calls--again supposedly subjectively.

2) True dat, but what's sad is that the supposedly top level, the NBA, probably is leading in inconsistency on travel calls imo.

[JoeTheRef]

Is there a possibility that a replant can be interpretted as a "jump stop"?

[Old School]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

BTW JR, I see a lot of travel calls made at the NBA level. I have watched five minutes of some games and seen 3 straight trips with a travel call. It is just a call that is not called very consistently at all levels.

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

2) True dat, but what's sad is that the supposedly top level, the NBA, probably is leading in inconsistency on travel calls imo.

True, I agree with Rut in that this call is not consistent. It was a point of emphasis this past season in the NBA to call more travels. What i think brought this to light in the NBA is LeBron in the Olympic games traveling just about everytime he got the ball. He would pitty-pat his feet before putting the ball down. I saw a lot of travels this year called in the NBA as well. One agaisnt Kobie in a game deciding play with 5 seconds to go. Kobie argued the call venomously but the replay showed him talking about 5 steps before dribbling. Great call....!!!! Why don't we get more credit for the good calls made.

I know I am not going to get that detail about this violation. It needs to be obvious, if not, I agree with the DI official you're just interrupting the game. I remember one hs game I had several years ago when my parter started the game out with about 5 travels. One on a wide open layup and all on the same team. Now that coach is pissed off and guess what, game goes into toilet. It got so bad that everytime a kid did something with the ball, TRAVELING from the bench and fans. At half, I told my partner, they're hs players, let em play. I'm not calling that nitpicky travel. I'm not watching nobody's feet that hard because I'm taking the broad global view of all plays in the game. (Damn sure I'm sitting there watching somebody feet and I miss the punch in the face.) Let's just make sure we get the obvious and everyone goes home happy. With that being said, I will admit that because of this, I will miss the marginal travels. I'll take that because I get game flow on the other end and once the players settled in to the game, they usually quit doing that anyway.

[Mendy Trent]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Whether we like it or not, officiating is a very subjective thing. All we have here are two officials that disagree on what needs to be called or how to navigate the game.
Peace

I think I understand what you are trying to say, but I disagree. We've all had observers tell us differing philosophies at times and we just figure out which ones work best for us and move on.

However, what we have here, obviously, is assignors who are saying to completely ignore the rules (and a directive) and take the easy way out.

Don't call an obvious travel because it might "interrupt the game" and get you yelled at even if it is is a travel (and a directive). Let the players commit illegal moves to avoid taking away a basket in transition.

Do penalize a player by calling a travel, even if they haven't violated, because it's the easy way out and you won't get yelled at.

It would be nice if the NCAA would start some oversight on assignors and get rid of the ones that are encouraging games to be called in ways that conflict with what the NCAA is trying to get some consistency on.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Mendy Trent

I think I understand what you are trying to say, but I disagree. We've all had observers tell us differing philosophies at times and we just figure out which ones work best for us and move on.

However, what we have here, obviously, is assignors who are saying to completely ignore the rules (and a directive) and take the easy way out.

Don't call an obvious travel because it might "interrupt the game" and get you yelled at even if it is is a travel (and a directive). Let the players commit illegal moves to avoid taking away a basket in transition.

Do penalize a player by calling a travel, even if they haven't violated, because it's the easy way out and you won't get yelled at.

It would be nice if the NCAA would start some oversight on assignors and get rid of the ones that are encouraging games to be called in ways that conflict with what the NCAA is trying to get some consistency on.

I have attended two Division 1 camps in the past couple of years. I have never been told to not call an obvious travel. I have never been told to not call an obvious violation when they take place. I have seen critiques from clinicians that said, "Why did you not call that a travel?" As a matter of fact there was a play in transition and I did not call a travel and two clinicians were on me about missing that play. As a matter of fact I have seen officials at camps called to the carpet (and I have been on that carpet) for not calling a travel only to call a foul on the defense later or award a cheap foul, which would have never happen if we called the travel. I disagree that this is an assignor's issue. Traveling is just a hard call when often many of these plays are not obvious. How many times have you heard someone call for a travel and the play was completely legal?

Peace

[IUgrad92]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

The reality is that they're turning the game into the NBA, which sureashell isn't a good thing. Coaches, players, fans and even us officials don't know what's going to be called on any particular play. There's no uniformity in rules-calling because they aren't calling by the rules. It's just plain wrong imo.

What constantly amazes me is that some big dawgs refuse to follow some very explicit NCAA directives and POE's. The sad part is that they do so while other big dawgs are.

Amen. I do HS varsity and down, and if I see a replant, I call it. Most of the time I get a relieving/sighing 'thank you' from the opposing coach, which tells me they aren't seeing that move getting called very often. And when the offending player's coach asks (if he asks) what the player did wrong, I explain and they have 99.9% of the time been good with it.

I'm finally starting to see coaches get on their players for attempting to make this move (after I call the violation). By definition, coaches are realizing that this is truly a travelling violation. There needs to be more stripes out there not worried about interrupting the game, or having the mentality, "Wow, everyone is yelling, so everyone must have seen something, I better call that and make it easy on myself." Just follow the d@mn rules, as written, to the best of your knowledge and capability. IMHO obviously, call me a traditionalist..........

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by IUgrad92

Just follow the d@mn rules, as written, to the best of your knowledge and capability. IMHO obviously, call me a traditionalist..........

Then why do we see legal jump stops called traveling much of the time? Not trying to get too socially contentious, but I see all the time urban kids complete a legal jump stop, only to see officials that are not used to seeing that kind of talent or officials that are used to seeing suburban and rural kids on a regular basis calling travels that were not there. I do not think that this has anything to do with people just not wanting to make a travel call. I see a lot of travel calls that just are not there, being made. Also do not get me started on the many high dribbles or when a player clearly does not have control of the ball being called.

Once again, this is the most inconsistently called rule at all levels. So I would not just say that officials are not calling something to stay out of trouble. I think many officials are not calling something because they do not have the judgment level (which is very important to get certain rules right if you ask me) to recognize a travel or some might not call something they are not really sure about.

Peace

[IUgrad92]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Then why do we see legal jump stops called traveling much of the time? Not trying to get too socially contentious, but I see all the time urban kids complete a legal jump stop, only to see officials that are not used to seeing that kind of talent or officials that are used to seeing suburban and rural kids on a regular basis calling travels that were not there. I do not think that this has anything to do with people just not wanting to make a travel call. I see a lot of travel calls that just are not there, being made. Also do not get me started on the many high dribbles or when a player clearly does not have control of the ball being called.

Once again, this is the most inconsistently called rule at all levels. So I would not just say that officials are not calling something to stay out of trouble. I think many officials are not calling something because they do not have the judgment level (which is very important to get certain rules right if you ask me) to recognize a travel or some might not call something they are not really sure about.

Peace

Agreed. I think too many times a travel gets called because 1) "It just looked ugly", or 2) "There's no way he could go from point A to B without travelling. And to me, neither is a good reason.

If I have a travel call, then I have a reason why. If the coach asks, I tell him specifically which foot was the pivot and what the player did illegally. If there is an 'ugly' play (no control, high dribble, etc) or if a player covers a lot of ground and I don't have a travel, then I make sure I know why I didn't have a travelling violation so that I could 'briefly' explain, if needed.

IMO, know WHY you whistle a play and make the reason rule based.....

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by zebraman

A player does the "replant" move before shooting . . .At halftime, I listen in to the D-1 ref/observer as he tells the official that he is "ruining the game" and to only call travels that are obvious to everyone in the gym.

I have also seen this travel, called it, and been told that it's not "one that we have to have". I don't call it anymore. But I really hate the "replant".

"Just make it easy on yourself and call the travel in that case. Nobody will say a word if you do."

This is where I personally draw the line and if it hurts me, so be it. (Your judgment on travels is not what is going to make or break your officiating career, anyway -- I hope.) I'm not going to intentionally make a call that I know is not supported by rule. No control, no travel. Period. If the coach complains, I have two or three quick phrases to tell him why I didn't call it. "No control, coach"; "Fumble, coach"; "He never had it, coach". If I'm too far from the coach to talk, I give the "bobble" signal that somebody else mentioned.

I once had a guy with a lot more experience than me at the D3 level once give me the same advice that you got, except it was about goaltending. Defender hit the backboard while trying to block the shot. Coach complained, but I couldn't respond because I was away from the bench. In the locker room, my partner says, "I think if you just score that basket, nobody would even say a word." Well, fine; but it would be completely incorrect by rule!

Just my thoughts. If somebody else feels like they have to do things a certain way to survive, then you do what you have to do.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by zebraman

A player does the "replant" move before shooting a 3-pointer........

It is a bad sign when a violation has been committed so much it has its own name. I have made this call many times, and I am aware that others do not call it. I see this much more often at the varsity level than at lower levels, which, to me, means it is conscious, not careless. Also, while it is sometimes a step back to create space from a defender, many times it is done with no defender in the picture. This says to me that it was done either a. for show
or b. for no reason at all. (same thing really) This makes me even less inclined to be "tolerant."