Three things to watch in a single play
 

Three things to watch in a single play on Yahoo! Video

1, is it a travel? 2, block/charge/flop? 3, is the initial rebound clean?

If that was Bishop Dwenger, then it was a travel, charge, and flagrant push on the rebound!! (And I am fairly certain the coach was WWAAAYYY out of his box!)

The video is too grainy to tell for sure, but the travel is close. It looks like he picks up his pivot before he releases the ball for the dribble, but it's hard to tell.
The defender looks like he was falling before contact was even made, I'm probably letting that one go.
The rebounder goes over the top, but I can't see any displacement of the player in front of him. From this angle, it looks clean to me.

1. Travel
2. Flop
3. Rebound bad angle to see contact, if any

My thoughts too.

1. Travel
2.Flop
3.Big guy gets rebound over little guy - nothing there
4. T and C both need to move more to get better angles

1. Travel. I have to admit though that I was more focused at looking at the travel at the end of the drive. The initial dribble looks like a travel as his pivot foot is lifted prior to the dribble, but as he ends, it appears that he jumps off his left foot, then obviously lands right, left. Though it is difficult to tell if he is already airborne when he ends his dribble.
2. No call here.
3. Does not look like much contact from this camera angle. "C" had the opportunity at the best look at it.

More importantly, what does everyone think of the officials positioning in relation to the play? This is my number one priority this summer, so something I want to learn more about from the experts in these situations. It appears to me as if T could close down on the rebounding action, and C could do the same (maybe getting a better look at the rebound??).

T & C closing down on all shots is a good thing. Position adjustments usually just require a step or two... stay connected :D

1. travel - pivot foot lifts before ball released
2. flop
3. could not see a push from the trail official's angle

1 - Appears to be a travel despite his hand being on top of the ball and him pushing down before the back foot lifts, it doesn't appear to leave his hand until well after the back foot is moving. *Tweet* Travel

2 - I've got nothing here. There is some contact no one is more responsible for it, and from the camera angle smells like bail out. PLay on fellas.

3 - This one burns me a little bit. I know coach of the defensive team wants the call. His kid is boxing out, the contact is minimal by the offense but its all the defender can do. I'm not a fan of the bigger stronger more athletic player getting to create contact , end up with the ball, and the helpless (hapless) defender is unable to do anything about it except try to do the right thing without being rewarded. All that aside by rule that appears to be a clean board. Play on fellas.

"I know coach I know, sometimes your just up against it. The contact is not what's gaining the advantage . . . Your kids are working hard but to be fair David didn't try to box out Goliath . . . yes it would be a flagrant, but you didn't see Goliath getting any boards in the 2nd half did you!!!"

I agree that there is probably nothing, from this limited angle, on the potential PC or rebounding action.

To those who are saying travel, do you mean at the beginning of the drive or at the end?

At the beginning, I still can't tell if whether he releases the ball or lifts his pivot first.

At the end, it appears to me (although, again not clear), that he ends his dribble with neither foot on the floor.

The pivot foot comes up first. It's not easy to catch at normal speed, but every game we work is at normal speed.

Except middle school girls . . .

no travel
no block/charge - from this angle it looked like a flop.
rebound was fine - hard to see if contact occured that gained an advantage.

Given that you're the only one who says this. What did you see?

Probably the same thing the officials on the game saw?:) I'm with you SNAQdaddy that the video and the angle make it tough to tell. That being the case a 'wise" OLD man once said that if you are not there you shouldn't criticize, that would be like eating your young!!!
In all seriousness, I'm giving the benefit of the doubt to the NO CALLS made in this situation. While everyone agrees that we had a flop and no rebounding foul, the case for traveling is being made with a lot of "seems" "appears" etc. While I would fall into that "appears" "from this angle" crowd, since I am not 100% I'll defer to the people there.
(Unless my earlier post about the location was correct then I stand by my original thoughts!)

I was just curious that he simply said "no travel," as if he would have disagreed with the officials had they made a travel call. He may have just been offering a short version of, "I can't tell, so no travel."

1) Travel is to close to put a whistle on for me. If I'm gonna kill the game for a travel, its going to be clear and obvious. That one is just to close to clearly say, yep its a travel without the benefit of slow mo and all that crap. I'm not cracking a whistle on this one.

2) Flop

3) Rebounder had a height advantage and was able to reach over a shorter rebounder. Doesn't look like much to me from this angle, play on!

The player probably lifts his pivot before the release of the dribble, but if you run varsity/college games back in slow-motion, the same thing will occur an incredible amount of times, and not by just a whisker, without a call.

IMO, the desire to call it in this one stems from the long stride in the first step.

I agree! I've been told that, if you have to rewind the play 3-5 times to see the travel its probably a GI. I dont call marginal travels...

Let me just say, the video here is too grainy to really know whether the travel is marginal, obvious, or non-existent.

You're right, though:
If he might have, he didn't.

True

There is only one way to definitively settle the matter. Have a poll!

Well, aren't you just the populist today.

Who should we get for this? Are we going to consider percieved bias? We would want them to "poll it both ways"? My first thought would to be use the Harris Poll. Since there is a tie in with both a coach (Del) and a player (Devin);)

Travel...

It is grainy but once he picks up the ball (or appears to) there is a step and then then two more because his "jump stop" has two distinct steps it has to be travel...

If this is a marginal travel call then I call way too many...

May have had a travel call, but definitely no whistle for anything else that happened on that play.

"Let's have a little traveling music Sammy. And away we go" ...
 

Agree. Still a tough call in a real time, real game situation. It took me several views of the video to spot the violation.

I am getting in on the fun late, but here is my take.

1) Travel by W44: A previous poster said that it was too close call a travel and he is on the correct school of thought in not calling a travel. In fact, I do not even think it is close to traveling.

2) Charge by W44: My labeling of this section should give everybody an idea of my feelings about this play. (a) The Black defender (I will call him B1 because I cannot read his number) had obtained/NFHS a LGP. (b) Yes, the camera is not the best, but my concern is that the T started to close down when W44 started his drive and then stopped when he could have and should have closed down two more steps, that would have given him a good angle to see if W44 made illegal contact with B1 or if B1 flopped. (c) Based upon my vast experience and number of years of experience: I have a CHARGE! on W44. :D

3) The rebounding play I do not care about because I have always stopped play because of the charging fould by W44, :D.

MTD, Sr.


P.S.: That means there is a missing choice on Snaqs poll, :D.

"The Black Defender". Good Name For A Comic Book Superhero ...
 

I can't question your assertion that the Black defender had legal guarding position, it's just that I'm not 100% sure why he fell down: charged into, tripped over his own feet as he was backpedaling, or flopped?

Check out the two steps after the jump stop. It's a tough call, whether in a real time situation, or even on the video, it can certainly be called either way, but, at the least, it's "close" to a travel.

Billy:

I watched the tape at least five time with regards to the possiblity of traveling and I think that from what I could see on the tape I think that before I would call traveling I would have to have been the T and seen it it in real time and not on a TV screen.

I agree with you that the video is not a very good way to determine whether B1 flopped or not, but you know my philosophy of when in doubt, CHARGE IT! because it is the American Way for everybody to be in debt, oh wait, that is my political stump speech, :p.

My concern about the charge call is that the T started to close down when W44 started to drive and then stopped instead of staying with the play. Had the T continued to close down one or two more steps, he would have continued to have a very good angle to see if there was illegal contact by W44 of if B1 flopped.

MTD, Sr.

I saw a player who clearly established his left foot as his pivot foot on the catch. I saw a player start a drive to his right using his right foot to start the drive. I saw a player alight nearly simultaneously (aka jump stop) before jumping to release his shot.

At no point did I see a travel violation committed by the offensive player.

IMHO, the only place that I can see someone calling a travel would be on the jump stop - and even then, I would disagree with that call.

Fair enough. It looked to me like he may have pulled his pivot foot before releasing the dribble, but I'm basing that more on ground covered since the video is too grainy to tell for sure. OTOH, the official on ball didn't call it, so deferring to his judgment wouldn't be a bad way to go either.

I was just curious to your reasoning.

I guess I missed the section in the rule book that says a jump stop can be nearly simultaneous. If there are two distinct steps it is a travel.

check out the section about establishing a pivot foot. it discusses what a player can/cannot do when both feet hit the floor simultaneously and what a player can/cannot do when a player "alights his/her feet nearly simultaneously". there is a difference....the initial act - deemed to be a jump stop - is not considered traveling.

in my experience, the higher the level you work, the more you will see the jump stop (whether simultaneous or nearly simultaneous) used.

I think the travel is close, so I give the benefit of the doubt to the crew.

If you watch the offensive player on the collision, he did not go through the defender (in fact he is able to stop on a dime and gather for a shot attempt). So the play was a Correct No-Call by the crew.

That last quoted phrase is in the FED / NCAA rules book? I haven't picked one up in several months, but I don't recall that.

And, I'm sure Kelvin has worked at a high enough level to see more than just a few jump stops -- whether legal or illegal.

Around here, you see it quite a bit even in high school JV ball. And if there's a discernible gap between the feet hitting, it's a travel IMO. That ain't "near" enough.