4-44 Article 3

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by kblehman

With all due respect, a jump shot does not entail switching the pivot foot.

True, but it does entail LIFTING the pivot foot. The original poster didn't see how it was legal to step with your non-pivot foot and then lift your pivot foot. To him, that seemed like "switching" your pivot foot.

Bob's point and Blindzebra's point was that if you couldn't lift that pivot foot after stepping with the non-pivot foot, the lay-up and jump shot would be illegal -- exactly because both require you to lift your pivot foot.

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by kblehman

Originally Posted by bob jenkins
Have you ever seen a lay-up? Without the rule, those would be illegal.



With all due respect, a jump shot does not entail switching the pivot foot.

kblehman, this thread is now 15 posts long and I haven't seen you respond to the good answers you've been given. Why do you continue to argue that somehow what you posted above is "switching" your pivot foot?

[kblehman]

Originally Posted by rainmaker

you're getting your vocabulary and the rule book vocabulary all mixed up, and it makes it hard to answer your question.

What you have to determine is when the dribble was ended (ball "gathered") in relationship to when and where the feet were positioned. From there you shouldn't have any trouble determining which foot is the pivot and what movements are legal.
[snip]
Does that help?

Rainmaker,
Thank you for your input; I apologize for my unclear explanation.

I think I'm pretty familiar with the game--I played competitive b-ball for 30 years and I'm in my 3rd year of HS officiating. So, despite the rather flippant replies of a few members, I was asking what I thought was a legitimate question and hoping for some clarification.

I wasn't talking about switching a pivot foot on a layup or drive to the hoop. I understand the difference between the steps required to finish a layup and a stationary player taking additional steps without a dribble. My question regarding 4-44-3 involves a player who has either used up his dribble and come to a stop and established a pivot foot, or has not used his dribble but has obviously established a pivot foot. In these 2 instances it seems to me that if his left foot is his pivot but he's allowed to walk onto his right foot to get off a shot, he is, in effect, switching his pivot foot without a dribble.

Say I play excellent defense and stop a player's drive down the right side of the lane. He pulls up his dribble on the second block and establishes his right foot as his pivot. I'm all over him defensively because I know he can't go anywhere (except straight up, or so I thought). But, viola! With ball in hand, he steps forward onto his left foot, jumps forward off his left and makes a layup. I guess I'm old school because I've always assumed it's traveling; the player has clearly switched his pivot foot without a dribble. But according to 4-44-3 this is legal as long as he releases the ball prior to his original pivot foot landing back on the floor.

LOL, I used to play with a couple guys who did this all the time. You'd play good D or maybe trap them in a double-team and force them to pick up their dribble, so you knew they could no longer go anywhere. And all of a sudden they'd step through to their other (non-pivot) foot and get off a shot. We always considered it to be a travel. Guess they were ahead of their time.

I've called that step-through move a travel a few times this year and never had it questioned. I've also let it go a few times and heard fans and coaches call for traveling, so I guess I'm not the only one confused by it.

[rainmaker]

Originally Posted by kblehman

Rainmaker,
Thank you for your input; I apologize for my unclear explanation.

I think I'm pretty familiar with the game--I played competitive b-ball for 30 years and I'm in my 3rd year of HS officiating. So, despite the rather flippant replies of a few members, I was asking what I thought was a legitimate question and hoping for some clarification.

I wasn't talking about switching a pivot foot on a layup or drive to the hoop. I understand the difference between the steps required to finish a layup and a stationary player taking additional steps without a dribble. My question regarding 4-44-3 involves a player who has either used up his dribble and come to a stop and established a pivot foot, or has not used his dribble but has obviously established a pivot foot. In these 2 instances it seems to me that if his left foot is his pivot but he's allowed to walk onto his right foot to get off a shot, he is, in effect, switching his pivot foot without a dribble.

Say I play excellent defense and stop a player's drive down the right side of the lane. He pulls up his dribble on the second block and establishes his right foot as his pivot. I'm all over him defensively because I know he can't go anywhere (except straight up, or so I thought). But, viola! With ball in hand, he steps forward onto his left foot, jumps forward off his left and makes a layup. I guess I'm old school because I've always assumed it's traveling; the player has clearly switched his pivot foot without a dribble. But according to 4-44-3 this is legal as long as he releases the ball prior to his original pivot foot landing back on the floor.

LOL, I used to play with a couple guys who did this all the time. You'd play good D or maybe trap them in a double-team and force them to pick up their dribble, so you knew they could no longer go anywhere. And all of a sudden they'd step through to their other (non-pivot) foot and get off a shot. We always considered it to be a travel. Guess they were ahead of their time.

I've called that step-through move a travel a few times this year and never had it questioned. I've also let it go a few times and heard fans and coaches call for traveling, so I guess I'm not the only one confused by it.

You're mis-understanding the nature of the pivot foot. Pivot foot doesn't mean it's attached to the floor, it means "the foot that can't be picked up and put back down". It can be picked up, as long as it's not put back down. So in your sitch above, you can step onto your left foot and lift your pivot/right foot, as long as you don't put it back down.

[kblehman]

Originally Posted by kblehman
With all due respect, a jump shot does not entail switching the pivot foot.

Originally Posted by Scooby

But it does entail picking up your pivot foot before you release the ball.

True. But would there be a problem if the jump shooter switched from his left (pivot) foot to his right, and then picked it up to release the shot?

[Scrapper1]

First, I'd like to say that I honestly think you misinterpreted some comments as flippant when they were not at all intended that way. You seemed to think Bob Jenkins was being flippant with his (albeit brief) answer about the lay-up. He was not being flippant. His answer was exactly correct. I think it's possible that it seemed to contain some attitude that it really didn't contain. I sincerely hope you won't resent the comments here.

Originally Posted by kblehman

I wasn't talking about switching a pivot foot on a layup or drive to the hoop.

My question regarding 4-44-3 involves a player who has either used up his dribble and come to a stop and established a pivot foot, or has not used his dribble but has obviously established a pivot foot.

Second, the traveling principles are exactly the same for those two situations. So your distinction doesn't really make a difference, from a rules perspective.

In these 2 instances it seems to me that if his left foot is his pivot but he's allowed to walk onto his right foot to get off a shot, he is, in effect, switching his pivot foot without a dribble.

And what Bob and I and others have been trying to clarify is that he is NOT, from a rules perspective, switching his pivot foot.

But according to 4-44-3 this is legal as long as he releases the ball prior to his original pivot foot landing back on the floor.

And this is exactly WHY he hasn't changed his pivot foot. The restrictions on traveling have to do with what you do with the pivot foot, not the non-pivot foot. You can always lift the pivot foot (with one exception) as long as you release the ball or request time-out before the pivot touches the ground again.

I've called that step-through move a travel a few times this year and never had it questioned. I've also let it go a few times and heard fans and coaches call for traveling, so I guess I'm not the only one confused by it.

And now, you've entered the world of officiating and you understand that coaches and fans know absolutely NOTHING about the rules 99% of the time.

[rainmaker]

Originally Posted by kblehman

Originally Posted by kblehman
With all due respect, a jump shot does not entail switching the pivot foot.


True. But would there be a problem if the jump shooter switched from his left (pivot) foot to his right, and then picked it up to release the shot?

pivot foot isn't attached to the floor. see above (or below if you have a browser like mine).

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by kblehman

In these 2 instances it seems to me that if his left foot is his pivot but he's allowed to walk onto his right foot to get off a shot, he is, in effect, switching his pivot foot without a dribble.

I guess I'm old school because I've always assumed it's traveling; the player has clearly switched his pivot foot without a dribble.

It's important that you realize this is not switching the pivot foot. Read and understand the definition of the pivot foot and what you can do with it, and it's clearly not switching the pivot foot.

Originally Posted by kblehman

I've called that step-through move a travel a few times this year and never had it questioned. I've also let it go a few times and heard fans and coaches call for traveling, so I guess I'm not the only one confused by it.

The step-through move has been legal for a long time. However, it can at times look awkward, so you many times can get away with calling it without lots of uproar, and there are lots of moves that look funny that aren't traveling, so fans are going to yell about them even if they aren't traveling.

Originally Posted by kblehman

I wasn't talking about switching a pivot foot on a layup or drive to the hoop. I understand the difference between the steps required to finish a layup and a stationary player taking additional steps without a dribble.

What many have pointed out there is that the play is actually no different...when a player establishes a pivot foot, he may lift that foot and jump off the other - whether he's "stationary" or not before that doesn't matter. The layup and the step-through are essentially exactly the same from a rules standpoint.

I hope you don't feel my answers and questions haven't been flippant...I just don't see what you're trying to accomplish here, unless you want to argue the rule should be changed.

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by kblehman

Originally Posted by kblehman
With all due respect, a jump shot does not entail switching the pivot foot.


True. But would there be a problem if the jump shooter switched from his left (pivot) foot to his right, and then picked it up to release the shot?

No, as long as his left didn't come back down. Because the right was never his pivot foot.

[kblehman]

Originally Posted by rainmaker

You're mis-understanding the nature of the pivot foot. Pivot foot doesn't mean it's attached to the floor, it means "the foot that can't be picked up and put back down". It can be picked up, as long as it's not put back down. So in your sitch above, you can step onto your left foot and lift your pivot/right foot, as long as you don't put it back down.

Ahh, I see. So in my situation, where the defender has forced the ball handler to pick up his dribble, the ball handler essentially has one step left as long as he unloads the ball before the original pivot foot comes back down.

I've always thought he had to leave the floor either off his established pivot foot or off both feet simultaneously. It still seems strange to me that he essentially gets an extra step (if he had continued his layup drive he wouldn't have) but I will acquiesce to the experts.

Thank you for helping me understand, and especially for clarifying the nature of the pivot foot. I appreciate it.

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by kblehman

(if he had continued his layup drive he wouldn't have)

I'm confused by this statement (confusion is a way of life for me)...how does he get an extra step on a step-through but not on a layup?

If left is pivot in both scenarios, and right is the "launch" foot, then isn't it exactly the same other than the fact that one was continuous motion and in the other he stopped, then completed the motion?

[kblehman]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

And now, you've entered the world of officiating and you understand that coaches and fans know absolutely NOTHING about the rules 99% of the time.

Trust me, that was the first thing I learned.

[kblehman]

Originally Posted by jdw3018

I just don't see what you're trying to accomplish here, unless you want to argue the rule should be changed.

Well, it's clear to me now that I misunderstood the nature of the pivot foot and its primary role in establishing whether or not a player travels. That's what led me to ask the original question. Thanks for helping to educate me.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by kblehman

Ahh, I see. So in my situation, where the defender has forced the ball handler to pick up his dribble, the ball handler essentially has one step left as long as he unloads the ball before the original pivot foot comes back down.

Without being flippant: Stop thinking in terms of "steps." Think of "allowed movement of pivot foot."

It's a travel when the pivot foot moves in excess of prescribed limits (or words to that effect from rule 4-travelling)

[kblehman]

Originally Posted by kblehman
Would there be a problem if the jump shooter switched from his left (pivot) foot to his right, and then picked it up to release the shot?

Originally Posted by jdw3018

No, as long as his left didn't come back down. Because the right was never his pivot foot.

Thank you, jdw. Your response prompts me to ask about 2 more scenarios. The first usually occurs in kids' games, the second occurs often in HS games.

1. A1 is being pressured heavily in the front court and is forced to pick up his dribble. Left foot becomes pivot. Defense now overplays the passing lanes. A1 starts to pass to A2 but sees it would be picked off so he holds up. However, his momentum has carried him off his left (pivot) and onto his right foot. So now he's balancing on his right foot, left foot in the air. This is not a travel unless his left foot comes back down, correct?

2. The point guard (A1) begins to penetrate, drawing defenders to him. A1 then kicks it out to B1, who is setting up for a three on the right wing. B1 catches the pass, then does a small bunny-hop to square himself for the three. The bunny-hop was with both feet and after he caught the ball. Is this a travel? (IMO yes) If so, how close do you call it?

Thank you in advance for your feedback.