Please help clarify - 'half step' rule
 

Hi, this seemed like a knowledgable forum as far as basketball goes, so hopefully someone can clarify what is the 'legal' European half-step rule. I have been unable to find a clear rule, but have seen it several times on TV and it always looks like a borderlie legal move/travel.

Thanks!

What rule set are we talking about? Where have you seen this move?

Sorry, I've never heard about a "European half-step". The traveling rule for FIBA is just the same as in NFHS and NCAA, AFAIK.

Ciao

Hi scw. Welcome to the forum.

The reason that you haven't been able to find a clear rule on a "half-step" is that there is no such rule. Traveling violations are not based on "two steps" or "a step and a half", as so many fans believe.

Traveling occurs (with a couple exceptions) when a player's pivot foot is raised from the floor and then returned to the floor without releasing the ball.

That's it. There's no magic number of steps or anything like that. If I'm holding the ball and I lift my pivot foot, then I must shoot or pass the ball (or be granted time-out) before that pivot foot returns to the floor.

So when you're watching those "half-step" moves, ignore the steps and find the pivot foot. Once you find the pivot foot, it's very easy to determine if a move is legal or not.

If you need to know how to identify the pivot foot, just ask.

Scrapper1, why then when the pivot is picked up and put down again do you think we don't call it?
I do, however, I only call HS level. College and NBA allow this. Why do you think this is allowed?

NCAA answer: Sometimes it gets missed. There is a philosophy that you only call it if your're sure (that is, it's better to miss a travel then it is to call one that isn't).

It (calling the travel) has been emphasized in the pre-season and in-seson videos over the past several years.

I'm going to echo Bob Jenkins. It gets missed. As I just said in another thread, traveling can be a very difficult call because of the speed of the play. Sometimes, it's nearly impossible to tell when the dribble ended AND which foot (if any) was on the ground when that happened.

I'm glad you call it and have some confidence about it. We're all striving to get it right as often as humanly possible, regardless of which game we're working. (That's probably overly optimistic. MOST of us are striving. . .)

It's not allowed. It's just not the top priority. That's especially true in the NBA. But as Bob mentioned, even in college, they don't want you to be travel-happy. If it's there and you know it, grab it. But don't call the borderline travel on a fast play where the feet hit so closely that it's not 100% clear which was the pivot.

High school officials miss travels too. Actually I see more travels by high school officials that are not there than any other level. That is because high school officials tend to call what looks funny rather than what is actually a violation. I see all the time legal jump stops called as travels. Or I have seen ball handlers fall to the floor without control of the ball be called for a travel as well. Those are probably the most common types of calls I see missed by high school officials.

Peace

Thanks guys. Between your responses and what I got from other sites regarding the rules, I think I got it. Basically it comes down to when you're executing a jump stop and when you're picking up your dribble if I understand it correctly. Thanks a lot :)

An NBA jump stop may contain several "half steps" without a whistle. The same applies to an NBA jump start.

When In Rome, Or In Spain ...
 

In 2001, my daughter's U15 AAU team participated in the Eurobaskeight International Basketball Tournament, in Lloret De Mar, Spain, involving teams from fourteen countries. I went along as a parent chaperon.

As I watched her six games, I was wearing three hats, that of a high school varsity official, that of a middle school basketball coach, and that of a team supporter, in other words, I wasn't observing the game entirely as an official, as I would today.

I don't know a thing about FIBA rules, but I did notice one thing right away in the first game, that carried over into the last five games, with many different officials: Traveling was called differently depending on where the offensive player was, and where she was going with the ball. If an offensive player was simply dribbling around the perimeter, perhaps using screens, traveling was called early and often, very strictly, no gray areas, and in many cases I disagreed with the call. On the other hand, when the offensive player was making a move to the basket that ended in a shot, it seemed like there was a lot of leeway given to the ball handler, it almost seemed that they were allowed a little extra before traveling was called, and again, I disagreed with some of the calls.

I know that a lot of Forum members will tell me that the travel rule is the same for FIBA as it is for NFHS, but I swear, the above mentioned situations occurred over and over again. Maybe it's not a matter of the written rule, maybe it a matter of local interpretations.

They called traveling on a player who was dribbling? :confused:

I have to disagree that it "just gets missed." "Missing" 3 or 4 in a game is one thing. But I can count at least 20 in any NCAA game I watch. Drives to the paint and low post moves are the worst. And while it maybe emphasized on videos, it's NOT being called in games.

So it's not getting called when it should be; and it's not just accidentally missing them. So what are you saying? :confused:

Can't Travel When Dribbling ...
 

Good pickup. Thanks.

I meant the player was called for traveling when she started her dribble, finished her dribble, or was pivoting. If she were out on the perimeter, she was more than likely to be called for traveling, even on a close play. If she were driving to the basket, starting her drive with a dribble, or finishing her drive by picking up the ball to shoot, she often wasn't called for a travel, like she was allowed a little extra. I even asked my daughter's' coach if he was aware of a rule difference in traveling from NFHS to FIBA. Like most coaches, he didn't even have a clue about written rules.

Even though I was there as a team supporter, I don't believe that I was biased, because I noticed it when either my daughter's team was on offense, or one of the other teams was on offense.

I know that I sound like a fanboy here, but please believe me. The European view of the travel rule appeared to be very different from my NFHS view of the travel rule.

I'm saying that missing 20 violations a game is not just missing them and that it's not being called when it should be.

Hell, the powers that be must agree with me. Bob told us that it's a POE in pre-season and in-season vidoes. Yet, it's still not being called. You tell me why.

The college game is following the footsteps of the NBA. Traveling is almost as prevalent in college as it is in the pros.

Are you saying you've never seen step step dunk no-called?

Are you saying you've never no-called this yourself?

We need to stop focusing on level. Traveling is the most inconsistent call at all levels. I think the difference between HS calls and college and pro calls is the fact HS officials call travels that often are not there. But to say it is not being called at the college level (and even the pro level) is a little bit of an exaggeration. Maybe it is not called as much as you like. But it is very easy to call things sitting on our couch, and then it is when you are out there on the floor.

Peace

IMO, I think there is some validity to how traveling is called by level. I think it has a lot to do with how most college assignors view a traveling call vs. a traveling non-call. If a college official misses a travel, not that big of a deal. Several get missed per game and they get very little attention unless they come near the end of the game and the media decides that it was a "game decider."

If a college official calls a travel that doesn't exist, that will definitely get the attention of their assignor. I have a D-1 buddy who just comes out and says that he is not a very good official when it comes to traveling and it has never hurt him one bit. It's like any point of emphasis... if it isn't supported by the assignors then it really has little effect.

I have seen HS officials call traveling when it doesn't exist on occasion too. However, I do think that the additional traveling calls in HS (even the occasional one that isn't there) results in more legal footwork at that level.

Well I think many travels I see at the HS level often perpetuate myths. For example I see legal jump stops called traveling all the time. Or when there is a jump stop, when certain elements are illegal, those are not called.

Peace

If you don't want to discuss a particular level, then don't. I couldn't care less. If I choose to do so, then that's what I'll do.

Lost In Cyber-Space ...
 

Hello. Is this microphone working?

Weren't we discussing European traveling rules?

There's no such thing as European raveling rules, William.

Agreed. Let's discuss the nuances of the European Un-raveling rules.

And here I was thinking the European half-step was some funky dance move I hadn't heard of.:p

Up until a few years ago the Travel rule in FIBA was different.
A player could gather up the ball, jump off 1 or 2 feet (As in Rebounding) land on 2 feet parallel (jump stop) then pivot and shoot.It was a great move that confounded US players in International Games.
That is why you see the players in the NBA who learned under this rule to "take the extra step". Ginobli does it all the time. Back in 2001 they were allowed this in FIBA.I forget when it changed.
Now the travelling rule is the same for all and should be called consistently.

The Rain In Spain Stays Mainly On The Plain ...
 

Thanks. My daughter played in Spain in the summer of 2001. I knew from observation that there had to be a difference in the travel rule for FIBA and NFHS back then.

Then what is it? Are you saying that college officials intentionally ignore traveling violations? Because that's what it sounds like to me. And I seriously doubt that is the case. (And it's also a gross exaggeration -- maybe an intentional one -- to say that there are 20 missed traveling violations in any college game.)

I already did tell you why. It's a very difficult call at high speeds. It can be very difficult to determine exactly when the dribble ended and then also determine which foot, if any, was on the floor at that point.

I have no doubt that I've missed it. I have never intentionally passed on it, when I knew it was a travel.

Hell, I watched about 2 minutes of game 2 of the NBA Finals and I saw a step step step step dunk no-called. There was a coupla minutes to go when I switched it on....LA was just coming back with a coupla minutes to go in the fourth.....some furriner with about 14 consonants in his name picked up the ball and.....honest to God.....took four(4) steps and then dunked the ball. No whistle. I shook my head, laughed, said "that's enough of this sh!t" and then turned it off again. Saw a story on the ESPN website the next day that said the NBA admitted that traveling shoulda been called. Well, no sh!t, Sherlock. Stevie Wonder coulda called that one. :D

So are you saying it's likely that Scrappy has actually passed on the occasional step step monster dunks in his illustrious career? Despite claiming otherwise?

Likely.... but never intentionally.....

Betcha that he never missed a 4-stepper though.....

I betcha he would take a good look at the gym before he left if he intentionally called a 2 stepper.

I really don't giveash!t what it sounds like to you, interpret it any way you like. Nor do I care if you disagree with my 20 missed traveling violations a game. College officials are getting just as bad as NBA officals in ignoring traveling. That's my opinion, right or wrong. But it's not wrong just because you disagree with it.

It's not difficult to tell when:

A shooter catches a pass and takes two steps while stepping up to the 3 point line.

A player changes his pivot while holding the ball.

A Big with his back to the basket steps with his right foot and then with his left foot on his roll to the basket.

I see these calls ignored in every game I watch. They're easy calls but they aren't being made. If it wasn't a problem, it wouldn't be a POE. You can deny it all you want but I've got the proof on DVR.

Pistol,

The travel rule in FIBA was the same in 2000 as it is now. I have the 2000 FIBA rule book to prove it. It may have been different prior to 2000 as that was my first year officiating. I doubt that it was EVER legal to jump off two feet and land on two feet. FIBA officials, correct me if I'm wrong.

Here is the 2000 FIBA rule:

Art. 35 Travelling
35.1 Definition
35.1.1 Travelling is the illegal movement of one or both feet beyond the
limits outlined in this article in any direction whilst holding a live ball
on the court.
35.1.2 A pivot is when a player who is holding a live ball on the court steps
once or more than once in any direction with the same foot, whilst
the other foot, called the pivot foot, is kept at its point of contact
with the floor.
OFFICIAL BASKETBALL RULES 2000
RULE SIX - VIOLATIONS
May 2000
Page 43 of 92
3a-00e
35.2 Rule
35.2.1 Establishing a pivot foot
• A player who catches the ball with both feet on the floor may
use either foot as the pivot foot. The moment one foot is lifted,
the other becomes the pivot foot.
• A player who catches the ball whilst moving or dribbling may
stop as follows:
− If one foot is touching the floor:
▫ That foot becomes the pivot foot as soon as the other
foot touches the floor.
▫ The player may jump off that foot and land on both feet
simultaneously, then neither foot can be the pivot foot.
− If both feet are off the floor and the player:
▫ Lands on both feet simultaneously, then either foot may
be the pivot foot. The moment one foot is lifted, the other
becomes the pivot foot.
▫ Lands on one foot followed by the other foot, then the
first foot to touch the floor is the pivot foot.
▫ Lands on one foot, the player may jump off that foot and
land on both feet simultaneously, then neither foot can be
the pivot foot.
35.2.2 Progressing with the ball
• After having established a pivot foot whilst having control of a
live ball on the court:
− On a pass or a shot for a field goal, the pivot foot may be
lifted but may not be returned to the floor before the ball
is released from the hand(s),
− To start a dribble, the pivot foot may not be lifted before
the ball is released from the hand(s).
• After coming to a stop when neither foot is the pivot foot:
− On a pass or a shot for a field goal, one or both feet may be
lifted but may not be returned to the floor before the ball
is released from the hand(s).
− To start a dribble, neither foot may be lifted before the
ball is released from the hand(s).
35.2.3 Player falling, lying or sitting on the floor
It is legal when a player, whilst holding the ball, falls on the floor
or, whilst lying or sitting on the floor, gains control of the ball.
It is a violation if the player then slides, rolls, or attempts to
stand up whilst holding the ball.

And I still agree with this.

Back in my first 2-3 years of officiating I was working post/base level military basketball tournament. Both my partners were veteran officials who had some college officiating experience. I had a 1-on-zero fast break in which the player obviously travelled in getting his steps together before his monster dunk. I blew my whistle and called a travel. During the next time-out my partners came up to me (with smiles on their faces) and said I should have passed on it.

Of course.

But Scrappy would blow the whistle every single time on this regardless of where he is.

At least that's what he wants us all to believe.

Which is what happened in the 4th quarter of Game 2 in Boston. They passed on it. Anybody who's ever watched a game could see he picked the dribble up at the 3 point line and ran the rest of the way to the dunk.

I'm going to clarify a little, and if you want to call it backtracking, I guess I can't blame you. I would never intentionally pass on BNR's scenario in my primary. Your comment about "regardless of where he is" made me re-think position on the floor. I might not call this if it were directly in front of my partner.

I think BNR's partners did him a disservice by suggesting that he ignore it. JMO.

Not sure why ignoring this vital rule out of your primary is consistent with the rest of what you've posted on this topic. After all 2 points is aften a lot at the more challenging levels and we both understand the concept of a game saving call. Obviously the step step dunk travel call is not a game saving call in your opinion.

Just wanted to comment on that, no need to beat this to death further.

Why?

Ok Guys I'm going to resolve this once and for all. I officiated FIBA basketball since 1972 and for 10 years before that NCAA rules.
The following is taken from the 1986 OfficialFIBA Rule book describing progressing with the ball as FIBA called it. I retired from officiating after 43 years following the 2005 season so I can't really recall when FIBA actually went to NCAA travelling rules.If someone wants I can go through all the rules changes and tell you but who really cares???
Anyway here is the way it was until they changed:


Article 54 Progressing with the ball: A player may progress with the ball in any direction within the following limits:

Item1-A player who receives the ball while standing still may pivot , using either foot as the pivot foot.

Item2 - A player who receives the ball while he is progressing or upon completion of a dribble may use a two-count rhythm in coming to a stop or in getting rid of the ball.

The first count occurs:

(a) as he receives the ball if either foot is touching the floor at the time he receives it,or
(b) as either foot touches the floor or as both feet touch the floor simultaneously after he receives the ball if both feet are off the floor when he receives it.


The second count occurs when, after the count of one, either foot touches the floor or both feet touch the floor simultaneously.

A player has come to a STOP at the first count of the two count rhythm, is not entitled to a new movement within the second count.

When a player comes to a legal stop, if one foot is in advance of the other he may pivot but the rear foot only may be used as the pivot foot. However, if neither foot is in advance of the other, he may use either foot as the pivot foot.

ITEM3 - A player who receives the ball while standing still or who comes to a legal stop while holding the ball,

(a) may lift the pivot foot or jump when he shoots for goal or passes, but the ball must leave his hands before one or both feet again touch the floor.

(b) may not lift the pivot foot, in starting a dribble, before the ball leaves his hands.
To progress with the ball in excess of these limits is a violation.

Since my scanner is broken I typed this verbatim from the 1986 FIBA rulebook Sanctioned by the president , Central Board , FIBA Mr Robert Busnel France

The following case situations were taken from the 1986-1990 official case book:
(Note the rules changed every 4 years with the Olympics)
-
Case 299 P39 PLAY- A1 receives the ball in the air, lands with both feet touching the floor simultaneously, jumps into the air and again lands with both feet touching the floor simultaneously. A-1 then pivots.
RULING - Legal movement, provided A-1 does not come to a stop and the end of the first count of the two count rhythm ( ART 54)

Note : That covers the catching with 2 feet jumping to 2 feet then pivoting argument. Every FIBA trained player in Low post did this on offensive rebounding situations. Did this ever piss off the Americans when it was allowed! And it was allowed because it was legal!!!Here is another version:

Case 300 P40 Play- After A-1 Has received the ball while in the air, both feet touch the floor simultaneously. He then springs into the air, landing (a) with neither foot in advance of the other: or (b) with one foot in advance of the other. A-1 then pivots, takes a step toward the basket with his non pivot foot, lifts his pivot foot and shoots for goal before the pivot foot returns to the floor.
RULING - Legal. A-1 has used a two -count rhythm in coming to a legal stop in both (a) and(b). In (a) either foot may be the pivot foot; in (b) only the rear foot may be used as the pivot foot.
(Art 54)

Nice move eh!!;) ( That's Canadian eh!!):)

Case 301 PLAY - A-1 receives the ball while his left foot is touching the floor. He stops then springs into the air and lands with both feet touching the floor simultaneously.
RULING - Violation. A player who has come to a stop at the first count of the two count rhythm is not entitled to a new movement within the second count (Art54)

Beginning to understand ???:D

Case 302. Play - A-1, while in the air, gains possession of the ball on a rebound and lands on(a) one foot or (b) on two feet simultaneously, leaps backward and lands either on two feet simultaneously or on one foot. A-1 then pivots.

RULING - Legal movement in (a) and (b) provided A-1 did not come to a stop at the end of the first count of the two-count rhythm (Art 54)

There are more cases but I think you all must get the idea.

This version of the traveling rule resulted in really spectacular moves by mostly European players. Had the likes of MJ or Kobe used them it would have been fun to watch.

I hope this resolves this question once and for all!

Great. You just resolved all our problems by citing rules that are <b>twenty-two(22)</b> years old. Yup, that certainly ought to do it.

Thanks for the contribution.

Here some of my thoughts on this.

1) I firmly believe that one of the reasons that an "obvious travel" gets missed at a higher level may becaue it wasn't that obvious. If you are in a game with the big guys (NBA and D-1 type players) There may be a lot more things going on to watch than the guys feet. If you are truly refereeing the defense, the ball handler may be secondary especially in a game with screens, rolls, etc. The offenders feet are the last place I may be looking when reffing fast big guys going at each other.

2) How many travel calls are you going to call a night. If you are a purist AND and called exactly by the rules, bring your sleeping bag because you'll be there all night ( how bout a blown whistle every time down the floor) There are lots of travels we dont call each game. We miss a lot of them because it might have looked like a good basketball move, or we did call it because it was out of place and player got an advantage...

3) If you are reffing the NBA finals a Kobe's got an uncontested dunk,.... Hey all those fans did not pay to hear you blow the whistle...

Well regardless, that's where it came from. Somebody started this post not me!! It was like that for years and since they only changed the rules every 4 years and JAy R says it was different in 2000 well maybe that's when it happened.
Sorry I took the time to explain Juraccic!!!:mad:

Some are more obvious than others. My son started pointing out uncalled traveling violations when he was 8 years old.



How many is too many? Does this mean you call a certain percentage or if there are only a few you do call them all or......what?


We hear this all the time. It doesn't fly with me. Kobe is arguably the best player in the world at this time. If he doesn't know how to dunk without committing a violation, he needs to just lay it up.

The rule changed in 1996 (or was it 1998? It doesn't matter much, I guess). After twelve (or ten) years, there's still people convinced that the rule still is the old one; among them there are also officials :(

Ciao

Unfortunately, that'd true....and that's exactly why the NBE is such a joke today......and if you do any reading, it's also why the NBE seems to have about zero credibility left when it comes to it's officiating philosophies. Nobody, and I mean nobody, can seem to come up with any idea of what a travel or a foul actually is anymore.

My thoughts.....

We're just making up excuses for some officials that are not doing a particularly good job at calling a certain part of the game. <b>Obvious</b> travels <b>are</b> being missed. And some of 'em are <b>obvious</b> to Stevie Wonder. Of course, if there's was any doubt at all, you don't make the call. It's always been that way. But now, it seems that there's a lot of "no doubters" being missed. If you call it by the rules, and it ain't as difficult as what you're saying imo, the players will adjust in one helluva hurry.

There's just way too much analysis anymore and not enough of "just call the damn game".

Jmo.

It may not fly with you but you ain't paying anyone's salary. Do you think it's an accident that those obvious travels aren't being called?

Careful JR! Heaven forbid that anyone hint that something's not being called properly. :mad:

You obviously didn't see last night's game. For some to compare Kobe to Jordan is ridiculous.

WTF does that have to do with it? Whether he's paying anybody's salary or not, a traveling violation on a superstar shouldn't be ignored.

That's just plain stupid.

WTF is has to do with it is do you really think NBA officials are "missing" obvious travels? Or would common sense tell you that the NBA's philosophy is to let certain travels go?

Please show me the post where I wrote that NBA officials are "missing" obvious travels.

And please tell me where I can find the NBA Philosophy book. Is it available inline?

I have an NBA Rules Book. I know what it says. If you're the NBA and write your own rules, then why not re-write the damn rule if you're not going to call it?

Face it! The NBA allows traveling. When you can watch an entire game and not see but one or two...NO...when you don't see a single traveling call, then they are allowing it.

And college basketball is heading down the same path. Right Scrapper?

Still waiting for BNR to tell me why it matters that JAR doesn't pay anyone's salary.

C'mon Kelvin, this aint all that hard to figure out, we non-big timers do this all the time.

If the matchup is in your primary referee the defense, look for body contact, etc.

If you're outside you watch for the pivot foot.

But Scrappy already told us he will not come in with a travel call if it's not in his primary. So he's saying the primary has to do all the work which we agree means the travels get overlooked.

QED.

Well.......

As Hank Nichols posted in his NCAA bulletin of Feb.12 of this year, one of his concerns was traveling. His comment was <i>"Adjudication of the traveling rules has been inconsistent, especially at the end of a dribble. This is true for players driving to the basket as well as post players making a move to the basket. Officials need to concentrate better on where the offensive player's pivot foot is when he picks up a dribble. The guidelines are clear and officials need to make a much more consistent effort in calling violations for illegal pivot foot movements."</i>

NOTE: Translated so that Dan_ref can understand-- <i>"I don't want to see any more of that damn step step dunk sh!t!"</i> :D

When it comes down from the Mount, there has to be a concern.

Whoa! Whoa! Whoa!!! We were talking about a particular play that was described by BNR, which was a 1-on-0 breakaway dunk. In that situation, there's no defense to referee, so I'm going to let my partner make that call in his/her primary.

And being a Presidential election year, I made sure to say that I "might" not make it from the C. If it's an obvious travel from the 3-point line (like Jurassic mentioned in another thread), then I would think somebody would have to make it, even if it makes the primary official look bad.

Well, IMO you're on that slippery slope and trying to hold on.

In my exchange with you I NEVER qualified the play as a 1 - 0 breakaway dunk.

All I asked was do you routinely pass on step step dunk.

You said no but you won't reach out of your primary to take it.

I can understand if you want to go back & reframe the discussion.

Dan_ref, I mean this with no malice, but that is complete BS. Go back and read your own post #38. You directly quote BNR's 1-on-0 scenario. So you referenced the breakaway and that's what I said I would likely pass on. That's what I've been discussing this whole time.

I guess it's true that the first thing to go when you get old is. . . Um. . . What's the first thing to go, again? :)

Thanks for the translation.

OK. Discussion reframed.

So pls explain why you're passing on an obvious violation leading to 2 undeserved points if it's not in your primary?

TIA.

Only by you. :rolleyes: This is a lame comment.

Good lord, you must be really busy this morning, because you don't even read previous discussion before making this kind of comment. You didn't read your own post before saying that you never referenced a 1-on-0 fast break and you obviously didn't read this comment that I typed on the previous page:

I'm done with this stupid "conversation". Wow.

Sure, if I was changing my story I would want to be done with it too.

Dan, if it's a 1-on-0 fast break and the lead obviously has nothing else to look at and he passes on it are you saying you would come in from the 'C' or 'T' and grab the call?

Me, I guess it would depend whom I'm working with. A newbie official, I come get it. A veteran official, I let him/her explain why there was no whistle.

I guess that's where we differ.

Whether or not I take this call does not depend on the skill of the guy who missed it.

That's the whole point. I don't think it's an accident. I think many violations are obviously being deliberately ignored. Like somebody said, if it's not gonna get called, change the rule.

We're in agreement here.

Seeing Tomegun signed on the site reminded me about this scenario. Guess a good question would be: If there is a 1-on-0 fastbreak why would the C or T be looking at A1? Shouldn't they have their eyes on the 9 players lingering behind the play?

The T monitors the lagging players. The C does what he needs to do - follow the play in or stay back, depending on what the next wave is doing.

The original good question was why would you take a call based on the seniority of your partner?

B/c as the C or T I would not be looking too hard at A1 in this situation. But if I were working with a newbie or rookie and they missed something obvious I would be more inclined to come and get it to save them the fallout from a coach that might ensue.

Sorry if I'm being a little dense, but you're not looking at the play but you'll take a travel to keep a coach from b1tching to a rookie? Is this what you're saying?

How does this make sense?

If I'm working with a rookie I'm more inclined to be looking outside my primary.

Not sure I agree with this at all as a general statement.

Abyway... if working with a rookie you follow the 1-0 break away? Or you hang back?

As the 'C' I would see no reason to go past half court.

So you're calling a travel on a 1-0 break away from HC as C?

Would you do this even if the travel occurs on the lead's side of the court?

What would you do? You said you would call it if I recollect correctly. Are you saying you would come across halfcourt on a 1-on-0 as the 'C'?

I would definitely not call a travel from HC as C in this sitch or (probably) any other sitch.

Whether I call the travel as C following the play to the basket does not depend on the skill level of my partner who missed the call.

btw... I'm not even sure I agree with you that the C should not go below HC in this sitch. But that's yet another discussion.

Me either.....

So, uhm, what does Damien think?

I don't think he wants to be bothered now... he's stalking you-know-who.

Damien will fix that little back problem right up. Even as we speak, he's sharpening his machete.....err scalpel.

That'sa my boy!

well I sure as he!! am not going to bother him. He might get esteemed.