Rhythm hop

[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.

[CMHCoachNRef]

Originally Posted by 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.

I had no problem calling it. I would have no problem calling it in the future. But, I will NOT be the only one calling it. If my peers would begin calling it, I would be happy to call it. It just isn't fair to the players if one of us calls the play a travel and the others lets it go. It's one thing to have one official "judge" that there is sufficient contact for a foul while another official "judges" that there was not sufficient contact for a foul in a similar situation. No two situations are identical. But, for something that occurs as often as it does in a game, to have one official calling the bunny hop a travel and the other two partners not calling this play a travel is a prescription for disaster.