What do you think about this?

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by tomegun

This is my opinion of this post: it rationalizes ball-watching and virtually gives license for an official to continue doing this. I guess it is hard to accurately describe the travel play, but it was directly inside the lane opposite where the C was. It also wasn't an overload and the C had to look past at least two competitive matchups to call this. I don't even remember if one of the players he looked past were moving to become secondary defenders, but it is a possibility and he would have been clueless. Let's think about this people, he called traveling which means he didn't just have awareness of where the ball was he was focusing on the ball. The play started outside the lane on the other side of the court and the travel occured right inside the lane. So it isn't a big deal to focus on a play that started on the opposite side of the court when you have matchups in your primary? Like Rocy said, he is a ball-watcher plain and simple.

I will pregame like I normally do and stress what I normally stress. He knows its coming and I know its coming. It is up to him to do what he feels is best for the game. BTW, this is one of those officials who complains about not getting playoff games, etc. I wonder why.

Sounds like he had a couple competitive matchups, and in that instance it's hard to see why he'd have been looking there. I'll take your word on it.

That doesn't change my opinion that there are times C can see right through the lane and see a travel (or other violations), but the more you describe this the more it sounds his attention should have been in his primary...

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by tomegun

During one game I saw an official call traveling from the C on a play that was right inside the lane in front of the Lead. The Lead had a whistle too.

I can see a call coming from the C in this situation. You said it was in the lane and based on what else was going on, he might have had a great look at this play. And if the Lead had a whistle, that just helps justify how good the call was.

Originally Posted by tomegun

On another play, this same official was at the Lead and a drive happened from the C's primary to the rim at approximately a 45 degree angle. You know, a normal drive to the hoop. The Lead had a foul on this play.

The question I would have is did the Lead call the foul on a secondary defender. Meaning, a player that did not necessarily come from the C's primary. Sometimes the lead has to come and get those calls if someone is helping on defense and smacks the shooter. I see what you are suggesting, but there just is not enough information to really say if this was a good or bad thing.

Peace

[Nevadaref]

I think that someone is ballwatching.

[tomegun]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

I think that someone is ballwatching.

We have a winner!

Rocky and Rut, the foul call was not on a secondary defender. Also, I have no problem with the outside official calling traveling, but more times than not that official will be the Trail, especially in the play that happened last night.

On the travel call, I was standing by my partner and we both turned our heads on a swivel and looked at the C. We looked at each other and asked why he had a whistle at all. Let me clarify a little bit. This play was not an overload and the Lead was not right on top of the play. The Lead didn't hesitate to call traveling.

This crew was very inconsistent overall. Calling fouls/violations all over the court and not calling the obvious in their primaries. I would hope we can all agree that fundamentally staying in your primary will result in more correct calls and a more consistant game. Can't we?