The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jul 14, 2010, 01:07pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 4
Can you cite the rule which makes this a travel?
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jul 14, 2010, 01:23pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Antonio, Texas
Posts: 1,342
Quote:
Originally Posted by docofficial View Post
Can you cite the rule which makes this a travel?
Rule 4-44

In the OP it was stated the player ended his dribble in an apparent shot attempt. So in my judgement A1 would have released the shot if B1 did not make an attempt to block it. But, since B1 made that attempt A1decided to returned to the floor with the ball.
__________________
truerookie
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jul 14, 2010, 02:36pm
In Memoriam
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Hell
Posts: 20,211
Quote:
Originally Posted by truerookie View Post
Rule 4-44-3(b) or 4-44-4(a), depending on whether a pivot foot was established at the end of the dribble or not.

In the OP it was stated the player ended his dribble in an apparent shot attempt. So in my judgement A1 would have released the shot if B1 did not make an attempt to block it. But, since B1 made that attempt A1decided to returned to the floor with the ball.
Narrowed down the cite.....

Travel, no matter what.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jul 14, 2010, 03:10pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 41
But I still don't follow.

Imagine a completely legal jump stop. The player catches the ball (ends his dribble) with one foot on the floor and jumps off that foot and lands simulataneously on both feet (4-44-2b2). If he decides to shoot while in the air, that is legal. But if he lands on both feet at the same time, that is also legal. By rule, it does not matter if he intends to shoot or not.

Can you explain.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jul 14, 2010, 03:56pm
certified Hot Mom tester
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: only in my own mind, such as it is
Posts: 12,918
OK - is your name docofficial or drofficial? Hey guys - maybe he's one of those Russian spies!
__________________
Yom HaShoah
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jul 14, 2010, 03:58pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 18,186
Quote:
Originally Posted by drofficial View Post
But I still don't follow.

Imagine a completely legal jump stop. The player catches the ball (ends his dribble) with one foot on the floor and jumps off that foot and lands simulataneously on both feet (4-44-2b2). If he decides to shoot while in the air, that is legal. But if he lands on both feet at the same time, that is also legal. By rule, it does not matter if he intends to shoot or not.

Can you explain.
I don't follow either.

Suppose A1 raises one foot as if to start a lay-up, sees that the shot will be blocked, and puts the foot back on the floor. That's not illegal (I don't htink), so I don't see why an otherwise-legal jump stop would be illegal.
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jul 14, 2010, 09:48pm
Adam's Avatar
Keeper of the HAMMER
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: MST
Posts: 27,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by bob jenkins View Post
I don't follow either.

Suppose A1 raises one foot as if to start a lay-up, sees that the shot will be blocked, and puts the foot back on the floor. That's not illegal (I don't htink), so I don't see why an otherwise-legal jump stop would be illegal.
And very early on the most relevant post, which should have decided this, is posted. Now I'll read the rest to see what the controversy is.
__________________
Sprinkles are for winners.
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jul 14, 2010, 10:01pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Antonio, Texas
Posts: 1,342
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snaqwells View Post
And very early on the most relevant post, which should have decided this, is posted. Now I'll read the rest to see what the controversy is.
I see a problem. If judged that A1 gather the ball for a shot attempt and (Continous Motion) came into play (IN JUDGEMENT) and A1 GOT foul. Would that be considered a shooting foul after A1 gathered the ball for a shot attempt and return back to the floor?
__________________
truerookie
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jul 14, 2010, 04:10pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Antonio, Texas
Posts: 1,342
Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by drofficial View Post
But I still don't follow.

Imagine a completely legal jump stop. The player catches the ball (ends his dribble) with one foot on the floor and jumps off that foot and lands simulataneously on both feet (4-44-2b2). If he decides to shoot while in the air, that is legal. But if he lands on both feet at the same time, that is also legal. By rule, it does not matter if he intends to shoot or not.

Can you explain.
Ok, imagine this A1 goes up for a layup and B1 jumps to block the shot. A1 realizes that the shot will be blocked, decides to return back to the floor with both feet landing simulataneously so his shot would not be block. You have the lifting/returning of the pivot foot to the floor. A1 had every intentions of taking a shot attempt.

Just because A1 lands with both feet does not constitute this a legal jump stop.
__________________
truerookie
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jul 14, 2010, 04:24pm
We don't rent pigs
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 7,627
Quote:
Originally Posted by truerookie View Post
Ok, imagine this A1 goes up for a layup and B1 jumps to block the shot. A1 realizes that the shot will be blocked, decides to return back to the floor with both feet landing simulataneously so his shot would not be block. You have the lifting/returning of the pivot foot to the floor. A1 had every intentions of taking a shot attempt.

Just because A1 lands with both feet does not constitute this a legal jump stop.
If he jumped off the one foot, and the other foot had not touched the floor, he had no pivot foot.
__________________
I swear, Gus, you'd argue with a possum.
It'd be easier than arguing with you, Woodrow.


Lonesome Dove
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jul 14, 2010, 04:25pm
APG APG is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 5,889
Quote:
Originally Posted by truerookie View Post
Ok, imagine this A1 goes up for a layup and B1 jumps to block the shot. A1 realizes that the shot will be blocked, decides to return back to the floor with both feet landing simulataneously so his shot would not be block. You have the lifting/returning of the pivot foot to the floor. A1 had every intentions of taking a shot attempt.

Just because A1 lands with both feet does not constitute this a legal jump stop.
If A1 ends his dribble with a foot on the floor, jumps off that foot with the intention to shoot but seeing B1 will block the shot decides to land with both feet simultaneously, are you saying you would call a travel?
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jul 14, 2010, 04:32pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Antonio, Texas
Posts: 1,342
Quote:
Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer View Post
If A1 ends his dribble with a foot on the floor, jumps off that foot with the intention to shoot but seeing B1 will block the shot decides to land with both feet simultaneously, are you saying you would call a travel?
Yes, in my judgement if A1 ends the dribble to attempt a shot and realizes if the shot is release it will be blocked..
__________________
truerookie
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jul 14, 2010, 04:52pm
In Memoriam
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Hell
Posts: 20,211
Quote:
Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer View Post
If A1 ends his dribble with a foot on the floor, jumps off that foot with the intention to shoot but seeing B1 will block the shot decides to land with both feet simultaneously, are you saying you would call a travel?
As written above, of course it's a travel by rule.

The player ended his dribble. It doesn't matter whether the player established a pivot foot while ending the dribble either. NFHS rules 4-44-3(b) and 4-44-4(a), as previously cited, both now say that the if the player then jumps to shoot, neither foot can return to the floor before that player shoots or passes.

You have to distinguish between the actual end of the dribble and the jump to shoot. As written above by yourself, A1 jumped to shoot, NOT to do a jump stop. And that's why it's traveling when he came down with the ball.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


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
Jump Ball - "Need to Get Away?" Fritz Basketball 19 Fri Dec 05, 2008 10:06pm
ABC's "Nightline" examines "worst calls ever" tonight pizanno Basketball 27 Fri Jul 04, 2008 06:08am
Can "FOUL" be made "FAIR"? PAT THE REF Baseball 60 Sat Feb 24, 2007 09:01pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:14am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1