4-44 Article 3

[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 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?

[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)

[rainmaker]

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.

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.

Always glad to help. My obsession with language can be a problem sometimes, and sometimes it's a real advantage. In this case, it worked for me, and for you.

My suggestion is that you start letting a lot of these borderline travel go (equally for both teams)until another official gets critical. Then you'll know you've gone too far, and you can tighten up just a little. Give yourself a chance to practice seeing which foot is the pivot, where the ball is gathered (dribble ended) getting a feel for how to see this before you start deciding where to call it. You're on the right track now. Keep pursuing that all important balance!

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by rainmaker

My suggestion is that you start letting a lot of these borderline travel go (equally for both teams)until another official gets critical.

My suggestion is that you ignore this suggestion.

There is NO such thing as a "borderline" travel. It's either a travel...or it's legal. Allowing players to score illegally is just wrong imo.

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

There is NO such thing as a "borderline" travel. It's either a travel...or it's legal. Allowing players to score illegally is just wrong imo.

I happen to agree with Jurassic here. The play you described is not borderline at all - it is legal, and that's why you should let it go.

I'll also add that the only thing I think is worse than allowing a player to score illegally would be disallowing a legal play like has been described throughout this thread.

[rainmaker]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

My suggestion is that you ignore this suggestion.

There is NO such thing as a "borderline" travel. It's either a travel...or it's legal. Allowing players to score illegally is just wrong imo.

Okay, let me rephrase. My suggestion is that while kb is still learning to see when the ball was gathered, whether the pivot foot left the floor before the ball left the hand to start a dribble, how to determine which foot is the pivot foot, that he err on the side of only calling what he's 100% certain of, and not using 75% or 80% certain as his determiner. Focus on seeing fully rather than on calling everything. When he sees more clearly, he can call more consistently.

Does that sound more acceptable?

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by rainmaker

Okay, let me rephrase. My suggestion is that while kb is still learning to see when the ball was gathered, whether the pivot foot left the floor before the ball left the hand to start a dribble, how to determine which foot is the pivot foot, that he err on the side of only calling what he's 100% certain of, and not using 75% or 80% certain as his determiner. Focus on seeing fully rather than on calling everything. When he sees more clearly, he can call more consistently.

Does that sound more acceptable?

Excellent rephrasing.

See the entire play and call traveling when it's there. If you know the rules and are still unsure, then you haven't seen the entire play and should pass even if you think it probably was a travel. Only call what you see.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by rainmaker

My suggestion is that while kb is still learning to see when the ball was gathered, whether the pivot foot left the floor before the ball left the hand to start a dribble, how to determine which foot is the pivot foot, that he err on the side of only calling what he's 100% certain of, and not using 75% or 80% certain as his determiner. Focus on seeing fully rather than on calling everything. When he sees more clearly, he can call more consistently.

Does that sound more acceptable?

What is highlighted in red above is not only acceptable imo but should also be the norm for all calls at all times.

The short version is "don't guess".

[kblehman]

Originally Posted by rainmaker

My suggestion is that while kb is still learning to see when the ball was gathered...

Simultaneously determining which is the pivot foot and when the ball is gathered is difficult for me when players employ the jump stop, especially if the ball handler is in traffic. Sometimes I can just tell by the look of the drive that he took one too many after he gathered the ball, but other times it's difficult to tell. (FWIW, if I don't know for sure I don't call it.)

Originally Posted by rainmaker

... whether the pivot foot left the floor before the ball left the hand to start a dribble, how to determine which foot is the pivot foot...

These I don't have a lot of trouble with. It's that pesky jump stop that's difficult for me to break down.

Originally Posted by rainmaker

...that he err on the side of only calling what he's 100% certain of, and not using 75% or 80% certain as his determiner.

I don't know if this is the correct overall philosophy to apply, but it's what I try and do for all calls. One of the things I mention to my partner just before the toss is: "Call what you see, but be sure to see what you call." IOW, if I don't see it, don't guess.