Syracuse/Marquette Official

[cmhjordan23]

Official admits mistake.Head of NCAA officials admits error in late call against Syracuse - The Dagger - NCAABBlog - Yahoo! Sports

[JugglingReferee]

Any thoughts about a travel?

[JRutledge]

It might not have been a backcourt violation, but that looks like a travel to me.

Peace

[Adam]

I definitely thought he traveled.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

I definitely thought he traveled.

Agreed.

[Mark Padgett]

Well, it certainly looks like a travel, unless he took that "second" step with his right foot after the incorrect whistle and would not have done that if the whistle hadn't blown. Of course, the video doesn't have audio of the play, so I can't really tell. But, in all probability, if the official had not first called the backcourt violation, he would have called the travel so the result of the play was the same as if the backcourt violation would not have been called.

[bball_lurker]

Wouldn't his left foot be his pivot?
Catch>land on right>land on left>step with right
We can't see if he moves his left with the ref in the way.

BTW, way to circle the wagons, even with the ref admitting fault.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by bball_lurker

Wouldn't his left foot be his pivot?
Catch>land on right>land on left>step with right
We can't see if he moves his left with the ref in the way.

BTW, way to circle the wagons, even with the ref admitting fault.

In NCAA, the first foot down is the pivot. Learn the rule before jumping on our case.

We've been saying this since the play first happened. In fact, we were saying he missed the BC call before the media even had it.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by bball_lurker

Wouldn't his left foot be his pivot?
Catch>land on right>land on left>step with right
We can't see if he moves his left with the ref in the way.

BTW, way to circle the wagons, even with the ref admitting fault.

Well, if going be sarcastic at least know the travelling rule first.

Right foot lands on division line (establishing pivot foot); left foot lands in front court; right if lifted off of division line and placed completely in front court (travelling).

And it looks like someone is Tardy to the Party:

2011 Tournament Discussion Redux

[rulesmaven]

Boeheim was on Bob Ley's show on ESPN (outside the lines) this afternoon and was pretty classy. He talked about how Marquette still had to make the shot and that one call doesn't decide a game. He also said the official (I think it's actually kind of cool that the media is not using his name, so I won't either) called him and apologized.

I think it's a travel, because I think he completed the catch with his right hand. But this play seems to happen an awful lot where there's an airborne touch, one foot down, but the ball is not gathered in both hands until the second foot is down, and it seems to be called as a two-feet-down catch. If the backcourt hadn't been in the equation and he passed on the travel, would it have been a bad call?

[26 Year Gap]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Well, if going be sarcastic at least know the travelling rule first.

Right foot lands on division line (establishing pivot foot); left foot lands in front court; right if lifted off of division line and placed completely in front court (travelling).

And it looks like someone is Tardy to the Party:

2011 Tournament Discussion Redux

Not sure if he had control when the right foot hit. But, if you go with the left as the pivot (after he had secured control), it looks like "Left. Right. Right. Start of dribble."

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by 26 Year Gap

Not sure if he had control when the right foot hit. But, if you go with the left as the pivot (after he had secured control), it looks like "Left. Right. Right. Start of dribble."

No problem if that is what you saw. But Lurker made no reference to the ball not being controlled. He said, "Catch>land on right>land on left>step with right", which is quite obviously a travel.

[26 Year Gap]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

No problem if that is what you saw. But Lurker made no reference to the ball not being controlled. He said, "Catch>land on right>land on left>step with right", which is quite obviously a travel.

Initially, that is NOT what I saw, as I was focused only on his feet. Easily, a travel call in that instance, assuming he had control of the ball when his first foot landed. But, it appears to me that until he gathered the ball in and had both hands on it, that he did not have control of it. In that case, would it just be ugly looking because he did not lift his left foot prior to starting the dribble?

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by bball_lurker

Wouldn't his left foot be his pivot?
Catch>land on right>land on left>step with right
We can't see if he moves his left with the ref in the way.

BTW, way to circle the wagons, even with the ref admitting fault.

And now that I'm re-reading this entire thread, who the f**k circled the wagons? May you be so kind to point the specific post that indicates a "circling of the wagons"?

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by bball_lurker

Wouldn't his left foot be his pivot?
Catch>land on right>land on left>step with right
We can't see if he moves his left with the ref in the way.

BTW, way to circle the wagons, even with the ref admitting fault.

OPEN MOUTH, INSERT FOOT. Dumbass.

And nobody is defending him. If you ead the other thread, I posted he missed the call within minutes of him making it.

Yes, he missed the call. Yes, the player traveled.

Would he have traveled had the whistle not blown? We'll never know.

Had the whistle not blow, would the travel have been called? We'll never know.