Jump stop vs "up and down"

[truerookie]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

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?

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by truerookie

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?

Determining the act of shooting involves a judgment decision by an official. Determining traveling does not. Traveling is based simply upon foot movement. All the official does is observe it.

[deecee]

Same scenario except

a. defender blocks the shot and A1 is unable to release the shot and returns to the floor with both feet
b. its a legal jump stop that the defender grabs and then A1 lands legally on both feet and regains sole control of the ball

so by some of your description NEITHER of these is a jump ball?

[docofficial]

Thanks for all the good discussion.

Some of these latter posts are getting to the heart of the matter: there are some interesting implications if it's not a travel. I, frankly, think the jump stop should not be allowed. It's too difficult to officiate (we've got to watch the defender [referee the defense] and still observe if the feet come down simulateously, the offense already has enough advantage in this game - they don't need another move at their disposal, and per this discussion, a smart coach and player could use the rule as its written to a tremendous advantage.

[deecee]

I do think intent plays a roll in this call. I personally have a jump ball in scenario A that I gave and I do believe its a travel. The jump stop was never intended in how the OP phrased his question and in this case I would dare any of you officials NOT call this a travel at camp, or in any game of any importance.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by deecee

Same scenario except

a. defender blocks the shot and A1 is unable to release the shot and returns to the floor with both feet
b. its a legal jump stop that the defender grabs and then A1 lands legally on both feet and regains sole control of the ball

so by some of your description NEITHER of these is a jump ball?

a. If the touch by the defender prevents the release, it is a held ball.

b. Judgment call. It depends on whether or not "undue roughness" was needed to regain control.

[deecee]

Originally Posted by just another ref

a. If the touch by the defender prevents the release, it is a held ball.

b. Judgment call. It depends on whether or not "undue roughness" was needed to regain control.

I dont see how you can argue 2 different things here when you dont think this is a travel to begin with. If b is a judgement call to you then so should a.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by deecee

I dont see how you can argue 2 different things here when you dont think this is a travel to begin with. If b is a judgement call to you then so should a.

My answers come from the definition of a held ball.

In the first case, an airborne player was prevented from releasing a shot. By definition, this is clearly a held ball.

In the second, no mention is made of a shot attempt, so presumably the defender simply grabbed or attempted to grab the ball out of the hands of the offensive player. Held ball or not? Judgment call. The jump stop is irrelevant here.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by deecee

Same scenario except

a. defender blocks the shot and A1 is unable to release the shot and returns to the floor with both feet
b. its a legal jump stop that the defender grabs and then A1 lands legally on both feet and regains sole control of the ball

so by some of your description NEITHER of these is a jump ball?

a. is a held ball

I have a difficult time answering b. because your writing isn't clear. Was A1 airborne and attempting a try or pass which was prevented from being released? If so, then that would be a held ball as well, but if A1 was merely holding the ball and never tried to pass or shoot, then it wouldn't be a held ball as clearly control was able to be established without undue roughness.

BTW the proper term is held ball. A jump ball is when the referee tosses the ball in the center circle.

[truerookie]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Determining the act of shooting involves a judgment decision by an official. Determining traveling does not. Traveling is based simply upon foot movement. All the official does is observe it.

Nevadaref, i cannot agree with this. I believe judgement is involved in all of this. If I deem that A1 jump off one foot in a shot attempt (ala Brandon Heyward of Butler half court attempt) and a Duke player jumped to block the shot and Heyward decided to return to the floor on both feet and attempt the shot again. Would that be considered a legal jump stop.

Come on!! we all know that calling traveling or not is a judgement call under normal game situation. This is why so many traveling calls are missed..

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by truerookie

....we all know that calling traveling or not is a judgement call under normal game situation.

To make or not make any call under a normal game situation requires judgment.
But the travel itself, by definition, is not a judgment call. Did the player move his foot illegally or didn't he?

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by just another ref

To make or not make any call under a normal game situation requires judgment.
But the travel itself, by definition, is not a judgment call. Did the player move his foot illegally or didn't he?

That was the point that I was trying to make, but TR didn't understand it. Perhaps I didn't make my argument clearly. I'll try again with a different example.

Let's consider an OOB violation. There is no judgment involved in making this call. Either the player was observed contacting the OOB area or he wasn't. Or it is a simple matter of determining which player touched the ball last before it went OOB. These are factual decisions, not judgment decisions.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Let's consider an OOB violation. There is no judgment involved in making this call. Either the player was observed contacting the OOB area or he wasn't. Or it is a simple matter of determining which player touched the ball last before it went OOB. These are factual decisions, not judgment decisions.

And A1 in the original post was either an airborne shooter or was performing a jump stop. The original poster in the original post made the factual decision that A1 was an airborne shooter and wasn't performing a jump stop. That means that there is no judgment involved when an airborne shooter lands still holding the ball. That airborne shooter has traveled.

[APG]

Originally Posted by truerookie

Nevadaref, i cannot agree with this. I believe judgement is involved in all of this. If I deem that A1 jump off one foot in a shot attempt (ala Brandon Heyward of Butler half court attempt) and a Duke player jumped to block the shot and Heyward decided to return to the floor on both feet and attempt the shot again. Would that be considered a legal jump stop.

Come on!! we all know that calling traveling or not is a judgement call under normal game situation. This is why so many traveling calls are missed..

Except on that shot, the player ended his dribble with his right foot on the floor, steps with his left foot thus establishing his right foot as the pivot, and shoots off the left foot. If he would of tried to execute a jump stop, by rule the would of been a travel.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Determining the act of shooting involves a judgment decision by an official. Determining traveling does not. Traveling is based simply upon foot movement. All the official does is observe it.

And the original poster determined that that it was an act of shooting with A1 as an airborne shooter. The original poster determined that A1 was not performing a jump stop. I answered the question solely on the facts given in the original post. The original poster made the judgment decision that A1 was an airborne shooter who came down with the ball and wasn't performing a jump stop.

Reading is fundamental and you're mis-reading the question asked in the original post.

I'm also done repeating myself with rules citations, including a case book play(4.44.3SitB&C) that contradicts you and is a duplicate of the situation described in the original post. I have seen nothing cited from anybody that would make me change my mind either.

Carry on carrying on.