The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Sun Jan 06, 2008, 11:49pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 208
QF1Y: Travelling Violation? --- With Video Goodness

I had my wife videotape one of my games, so I could see things like my posture and 'presence' on the court.

End of the game situation. Team A inbounds and passes the ball up towards the division line where defensive pressure causes the ball to be rolling on the floor. Player A1 almost loses ball out-of-bounds, but brings it back under control inbounds. (this is where that player becomes visible on the video)

Player A1 is on his knees with control of the basketball. He shifts his weight onto his right knee to pass to a teammate. In doing so, his left knee lifts off of the floor. I thought that in order for there to be a travel, A1 would need to be 'attempting to get up' which I did not feel that he was doing.

Let me know your thoughts....
YouTube Link

I guess that the follow up would be could that same player have a 'pivot knee'? ... lifting a knee so that his foot could then propel them around in a circle?

ps. Nice finish by Team A player just prior to buzzer!

Last edited by ca_rumperee; Mon Jan 07, 2008 at 12:23am.
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jan 07, 2008, 12:07am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 9,466
Send a message via AIM to rainmaker
I wouldn't call it.

The video plays in slo-mo? Very artsy, but kinda hard to concentrate on the action.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jan 07, 2008, 12:23am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 208
I've added a copy with real time and then slow motion.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rainmaker
I wouldn't call it.

The video plays in slo-mo? Very artsy, but kinda hard to concentrate on the action.
How about this one:
link
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jan 07, 2008, 12:32am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 9,466
Send a message via AIM to rainmaker
Quote:
Originally Posted by ca_rumperee
How about this one:
link
Much better. I still wouldn't call it!

And you're right about the shot at the end. Very nice!
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jan 07, 2008, 02:14am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 14,995
a. The play is perfectly legal.

b. There is no such thing as a pivot knee. Per 4-33 the pivot is specifically a foot. A player who gains control of the ball while not standing is governed by the rules which dictate what a player on the floor may and may not do. (4-44-5b and case book ruling 4.44.5 Sit B)
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jan 07, 2008, 06:23am
In Memoriam
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Hell
Posts: 20,211
Quote:
Originally Posted by ca_rumperee
I had my wife videotape one of my games, so I could see things like my posture and 'presence' on the court.
Use it to check your mechanics too.

1) You didn't have a ten second count going.

2) Ditch the "safe" signal.
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jan 07, 2008, 08:03am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,842
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee
Use it to check your mechanics too.

1) You didn't have a ten second count going.

2) Ditch the "safe" signal.

You beat me to it.

For style points, don't have your arms dragging at your sides.
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jan 07, 2008, 08:10am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 16
imo it is good officiating to not have a ten second count going here when it is impossible to have a ten second violation.

shows, to me, that you are into the game and understand the situation/what is going on.
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jan 07, 2008, 08:16am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 14,995
Quote:
Originally Posted by INUmp
imo it is good officiating to not have a ten second count going here when it is impossible to have a ten second violation.

shows, to me, that you are into the game and understand the situation/what is going on.

Disagree 100%. What if the timer fails to start the clock?
Always count. It provides definite knowledge for correcting a timing error.
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jan 07, 2008, 08:17am
In Memoriam
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Hell
Posts: 20,211
Quote:
Originally Posted by INUmp
imo it is good officiating to not have a ten second count going here when it is impossible to have a ten second violation.

shows, to me, that you are into the game and understand the situation/what is going on.
Disagree completely. It's terrible officiating. If the clock isn't started properly, what "definite information" do you now have available to fix the screw-up?
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jan 07, 2008, 08:18am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,081
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee
Use it to check your mechanics too.

1) You didn't have a ten second count going.

2) Ditch the "safe" signal.
Exactly, always have 10 second count going! It's very important if there happens to be a timing issue, especially in the last few seconds of a quarter.
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jan 07, 2008, 08:24am
Fav theme: Roundball Rock
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Near Dog River (sorta)
Posts: 8,558
Devil's advocate?

Quote:
Originally Posted by INUmp
imo it is good officiating to not have a ten second count going here when it is impossible to have a ten second violation.

shows, to me, that you are into the game and understand the situation/what is going on.
The way I see it, the only argument against this approach is say there is a count started when there is less than 10 seconds on the clock. Specifically, say 9.8s is on the clock.

Let's also say that you (or said official) is very consistent in their 10-second counts. IOW, they have already called 4 this game (or even 1 or more than 4), and I'll even say that they've called 2 on each team. In each case, the actual amount of time allowed for the ball to earn FC status before a violation was called was less than 10s, and around 9.1s. IOW, the covering official actually has a fast count.

In this case, the "5th" case, if you do not continue to "chop" 10-seconds as you have been doing, and call that same violation at 9.1s, then you are not being consistent, and IMHO, doing a disservice to the game.

No, I do understand that no two times will be exact, but it's important that they be consistent. If a 10-second count occurs earlier in the game with clearly only 9 seconds coming off the clock, then when 9.9s is on the clock, and you don't have a 10s violation, IMHO, the coach has reason to wonder about your consistency.

Edit: another argument is for definite knowledge of timing errors.
__________________
Pope Francis

Last edited by JugglingReferee; Mon Jan 07, 2008 at 08:26am.
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jan 07, 2008, 08:38am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 14,995
Quote:
Originally Posted by JugglingReferee
The way I see it, the only argument against this approach is say there is a count started when there is less than 10 seconds on the clock. Specifically, say 9.8s is on the clock.

Let's also say that you (or said official) is very consistent in their 10-second counts. IOW, they have already called 4 this game (or even 1 or more than 4), and I'll even say that they've called 2 on each team. In each case, the actual amount of time allowed for the ball to earn FC status before a violation was called was less than 10s, and around 9.1s. IOW, the covering official actually has a fast count.

In this case, the "5th" case, if you do not continue to "chop" 10-seconds as you have been doing, and call that same violation at 9.1s, then you are not being consistent, and IMHO, doing a disservice to the game.

No, I do understand that no two times will be exact, but it's important that they be consistent. If a 10-second count occurs earlier in the game with clearly only 9 seconds coming off the clock, then when 9.9s is on the clock, and you don't have a 10s violation, IMHO, the coach has reason to wonder about your consistency.

Edit: another argument is for definite knowledge of timing errors.
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jan 07, 2008, 09:46am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee
Use it to check your mechanics too.

1) You didn't have a ten second count going.

2) Ditch the "safe" signal.
Well, there were 4.5 seconds on the clock when inbounding, so I turned my 10 second clock off.

Safe signal is going on the shelf.
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jan 07, 2008, 10:18am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 14,616
I don't count when the BC count would start with less than 10 seconds on the clock. But I always look at the clock in such a situation so that I know that it's running.
__________________
"...as cool as the other side of the pillow." - Stuart Scott

"You should never be proud of doing the right thing." - Dean Smith
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Thank Goodness Summer Ball is almost over Stat-Man Basketball 5 Sun Aug 12, 2007 11:05pm
TRAVELLING VIOLATION abstrakt Basketball 7 Mon Oct 04, 2004 11:50pm
Travelling & lane violation Rock Basketball 12 Wed Feb 25, 2004 06:46pm
Little League Travelling Violation Luv4Asian8 Basketball 11 Wed Jan 14, 2004 11:11am
Travelling Bull Run Ref Basketball 2 Wed Mar 29, 2000 02:41pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:53am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1