Originally Posted by Snaqwells (Post 703985)

That's all I was asking for. :) I can go have lunch now.

Originally Posted by JohnDorian37 (Post 703958)

So it seems that unless I rule the contact to be more than just a play on the ball, it's just a travel and no foul.

It makes sense to say that if the contact would have been just a regular personal foul had the ball still been live, and the defender was committed to the contact when the ball became dead, that it can't be an intentional foul.

Originally Posted by Back In The Saddle (Post 703988)

So, yes...travel, dead ball, contact is ignored (other than the usual game management you would employ after a player gets run over).

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee (Post 703996)

My game management recommendation is to wince and say "Ooooooooo, I'll betcha that smarts."

Originally Posted by Back In The Saddle (Post 704003)

You forgot to make a bitter beer face. You're not believable without the bitter beer face.

Originally Posted by mbyron (Post 704005)

Please note that the correctness of this statement does NOT imply that he is otherwise believable.
:D

Originally Posted by JohnDorian37 (Post 703923)

I witnessed this play at an intramural game last night--I wasn't officiating at the time, so I didn't make the call.

Player was behind the arc and jumped up to shoot a 3. A defender was closing in fast and this guy realized it while in the air so instead of shooting the ball, he sort of just cowered and tucked the ball. He landed first, the ball never leaving his hands, and then the defender crashed into him.

Travel?

Originally Posted by Back In The Saddle (Post 704007)

If this were that other "geometry" thread, I'd restate that as "the converse is not (necessarily) true". :)

Originally Posted by 26 Year Gap (Post 704033)

How do you know he was wearing Converse?