4-44 Article 3

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by SamIAm

Wouldn't a layup still be legal per the Jumpstop rule.

A jumpstop and a layup are not related. When a player legally performs what is commonly known as a jumpstop, (this term, as far as I know, does not appear in any NFHS book) he comes to a legal stop. He may or may not shoot afterward, but if he lifts either foot, he may not return it to the floor before releasing the ball.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by just another ref

A jumpstop and a layup are not related. When a player legally performs what is commonly known as a jumpstop, (this term, as far as I know, does not appear in any NFHS book) he comes to a legal stop. He may or may not shoot afterward, but if he lifts either foot, he may not return it to the floor before releasing the ball.

While you are correct that the term doesn't appear in the NFHS rules book (I seem to recall it being used on one case or interp a few years ago), it appears in the NCAA book, and it means BOTH 1) landing on one foot, jumping off it and then landing on both -- neither can be the pivot; AND 2) Landing on both feet simultaneously -- either can be the pivot.

In my experience, most HS officials only mean the first (e.g., your post); most HS coaches only mean the second. Thus the disconnect when we talk to coaches using that term.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

In my experience, most HS officials only mean the first (e.g., your post); most HS coaches only mean the second. Thus the disconnect when we talk to coaches using that term.

In my experience, most coaches use it to explain away a traveling violation called on their own team.

"What?? That was a jumpstop!!"