Rhythm hop

[CMHCoachNRef]

Originally Posted by shishstripes

Another one that I was talking to the coaches about and you see it in the boy's side more is on a lay-in, the first step is the pivot foot landing and second foot is a pivot. But often they will drag the pivot foot to slow themselves down and get under control.

Why no call?

This one sounds like a standard lay-up to me. Both feet off the ground the moment the dribble is picked up/pass received. The first foot that lands becomes the pivot foot. The second foot then lands as the pivot foot leaves the floor. The second foot then leaves the floor and the ball is released. The pivot foot then lands. No travel because the pivot foot did not return to the floor before the ball was released for a try.

Or am I misunderstanding what you are saying?

[JoeT]

Originally Posted by CMHCoachNRef

...the coaches seemed to be complaining when I DID call this a travel. The coaches of the defensive teams did NOT complain when my partners did NOT make this call. Therefore, for consistency within the game, I stopped making this call. I virtually never hear a complaint about this not being called.

So this travel (by your definition) won't start getting called correctly until we complain? Moreover, coaches complaining incorrectly have in part caused you not to call what you believe to be a travel?

You can see how we become "howler monkeys." Many of us work hard to understand the rules to the best of our ability (part of the reason I read this forum so much). There are a lot of rules (and points of emphasis, too) that are knowingly set aside by an official's choice.

Originally Posted by CMHCoachNRef

In addition, in games I watch, I almost never see this being called. I think that an important aspect of officiating is consistency.

I agree that you should be consistent - with your partners and with the actual rules of the game (and the points the NF has asked you to emphasize). Not trying to pick on you so much, but you'd be amazed how often officials tell me something that amounts to "I know that's the rule, but we're not going to call it that way."

You guys have every right to be frustrated with us when we don't know the rules as well as we should, but you can't really have it both ways. I know the rules reasonably well (as do many of my colleagues), and it's frustrating when I'm told which rules we're going to change or set aside on any given day.

-j

[CMHCoachNRef]

Originally Posted by JoeT

So this travel (by your definition) won't start getting called correctly until we complain? Moreover, coaches complaining incorrectly have in part caused you not to call what you believe to be a travel?

You can see how we become "howler monkeys." Many of us work hard to understand the rules to the best of our ability (part of the reason I read this forum so much). There are a lot of rules (and points of emphasis, too) that are knowingly set aside by an official's choice.



I agree that you should be consistent - with your partners and with the actual rules of the game (and the points the NF has asked you to emphasize). Not trying to pick on you so much, but you'd be amazed how often officials tell me something that amounts to "I know that's the rule, but we're not going to call it that way."

You guys have every right to be frustrated with us when we don't know the rules as well as we should, but you can't really have it both ways. I know the rules reasonably well (as do many of my colleagues), and it's frustrating when I'm told which rules we're going to change or set aside on any given day.

-j

JoeT,
I will tell you that as a coach, I understand where you are coming from completely. The game of basketball has changed dramatically over the past 30+ years since I was in high school. I believe that five of the past eight years a POE has been "rough play in the post." ALL COACHES fully support calling the game tighter in the post, RIGHT UP TO THE POINT that the coach's best post player picks up his/her second foul two minutes into the game. If an official makes these calls two, three, four games in a row, the assignor will be calling them. The same goes with the "bunny hop" travel. You see this play all day long watching NCAA games on TV. Further, you will see it in nearly all HS games -- at least at the varsity level. It stopped getting called because coaches complained like crazy when it was called. Personally, I think that this play started at the college level. The college officials who also do high school games began not calling this hop at the high school level. Since the college officials are frequently some of the more respected high school officials, many of the other high school officials began following their lead. Now, the coaches do not want it to be called -- against them or for them -- in the vast majority of cases.

The bunny hop is now so common, that I wish (for the sake of you and the few other coaches who expect a call here), that the NFHS would just allow this move by rule. This scenario is not different than the "shrinking strike zone" in baseball. Call a strike at the armpit and the offensive coach would complain and the defensive coach would smile.

[vbzebra]

Originally Posted by CMHCoachNRef

I can tell you that this call is NOT made in my part of the country by 95+% of the officials. To me, this is clearly a travel, but it is not called. I have accepted the fact that it is not called -- I must admit that I do not call it anymore as I was in the less than 5% who called it last season. Defensive coaches do not expect this call to be made, anymore.

The truly perplexing scenario here is that many officials will allow players to do the hop AND then PIVOT or take a jab step before dribbling.

There is no way around the fact that by book rule this is a travel -- as a point of comparison I ask if a player can receive the ball on a jump stop, immediately go up in the air to take a jump shot only to return to the floor with the ball because the defender would have blocked the shot, EVERY OFFICIAL will tell me that this is a travel. But the bunny hop is legal? Same foot action, just a smaller jump.

Once again, I have stopped calling the bunny hop because virtually all other local officials are doing the same. But, clearly, from a pure Rules Book perspective, this is a travel.

The argument that I have heard from fellow officials is that the player has not yet established a pivot foot when he lands on both feet upon receiving the ball (jump stop). They claim that the since the player has not established a pivot foot, the player can land again -- because you can't travel until the pivot foot hits the ground after leaving the ground. Of course, the problem with this logic is that a player could, in theory, bunny hop his way all the way to the basket since both feet would be landing at the same time, no pivot foot would ever be established.

And no, this is not a case of the players sometimes "squaring in the air" BEFORE receiving the ball. These situations are clear cases of shooters -- frequently outside the arc -- catching the ball with both feet on the ground or catching the ball with both feet in the air and then landing, THEN hopping with BOTH feet off the ground and then returning to the ground again before shooting. If you call this in my neck of the woods, you will be in a very small minority of officials.

Actually, that is NOT a travel, correct? If its a shot attempt, its either a block or a jump ball in that situation, right? Or am I thinking too much? Or not enough?

[zm1283]

Originally Posted by vbzebra

Actually, that is NOT a travel, correct? If its a shot attempt, its either a block or a jump ball in that situation, right? Or am I thinking too much? Or not enough?

The post that you quoted was saying that the shooter went up but came back down without the ball being touched or being prevented from being released. That is a travel.

[vbzebra]

Originally Posted by zm1283

The post that you quoted was saying that the shooter went up but came back down without the ball being touched or being prevented from being released. That is a travel.

Gotcha. In my feeble tv in my head, the shot was released, blocked, and then caught by A1 who came back down with it. THAT would not be a travel. But you'r right, if he went up and came back down without the ball being touched or prevented from being released, its a travel. i see what you're saying. Thanks!

[doubleringer]

I've had numerous conversations with other officials on this play over the last few years. I had a college conference assignor and DI official tell me, "yes it is a travel, no, don't call it." The women's side gave us the green light to make this call in the POE's this season. I like calling it. Allowing a shooter to set their feet illegaly is a huge advantage to the offense.