video on jump stop, daughter gets called for travel

[refiator]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

And a call that is often made when the player really doesn't travel.

Indeed. It works both ways.

[Rob1968]

In regards to the video, 1:27 -1:49:
Take a look at 4-44-3b ... After coming to a stop and establishing a pivot foot: if the player jumps, neither foot may return to the floor, before the ball is released on a pass or try for goal.
This is what I understand to be a "drop-step", and in the video, both feet are off the floor (jump), and then the left foot returns to the floor before the ball is released on a try, thus a travel call. This move, to be legal, must have the non-pivot foot in contact with the floor, before the pivot foot is lifted. Admittedly, it is sometimes missed, due to the speed of the move.

[Adam]

There's a difference between a long stride and a jump.

[Rob1968]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

There's a difference between a long stride and a jump.

Help me out. A jump is to have both feet off the floor at the same time, which fits the statement in 4-44-3b. ... when it refers to "... neither foot may be returned to the floor before the ball is released on a pass or a try for goal."

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Rob1968

Help me out. A jump is to have both feet off the floor at the same time, which fits the statement in 4-44-3b. ... when it refers to "... neither foot may be returned to the floor before the ball is released on a pass or a try for goal."

I don't believe a jump is defined that broadly. Every layup ever shot involves steps that would fit your definition of a jump.

[Rob1968]

The context is established with the initial statement of4-44-3 . . . After coming to a stop and establishing a pivot foot: - which the player does at the 1:27 mark. Then, having moved the left foot rearward, she jumps (both feet leaving the floor) and alights on the left foot, before releasing the ball.
I agree that in real time, this move is rarely called a travel. A completely clean - legal - drop-step would involve the non-pivot foot being in contact with the floor, before the pivot foot is lifted. Indeed, if that is the case, until the pivot foot touches again, it cannot be a travel.
Yes, on a normal drive to the basket, at a run, both feet are off the floor three times, without the action incurring a travel violation.
This entire sdcenario is not the main subject of the OP, in as much as a jump-stop is quite a different move.

[APG]

In real time, and in slow motion, I don't have a travel.

[jump stop]

Originally Posted by Rob1968

The context is established with the initial statement of4-44-3 . . . After coming to a stop and establishing a pivot foot: - which the player does at the 1:27 mark. Then, having moved the left foot rearward, she jumps (both feet leaving the floor) and alights on the left foot, before releasing the ball.
I agree that in real time, this move is rarely called a travel. A completely clean - legal - drop-step would involve the non-pivot foot being in contact with the floor, before the pivot foot is lifted. Indeed, if that is the case, until the pivot foot touches again, it cannot be a travel.
Yes, on a normal drive to the basket, at a run, both feet are off the floor three times, without the action incurring a travel violation.
This entire sdcenario is not the main subject of the OP, in as much as a jump-stop is quite a different move.

If this is true then it seems like every layup in which the person is running would be a travel because I have heard it is impossible to run and have both feet touch at the same time. Try running and have both feet on floor at same time. Look at layup shown on video at around 1:05 , pivot foot is lifted before left heel touches.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Rob1968

The context is established with the initial statement of4-44-3 . . . After coming to a stop and establishing a pivot foot: - which the player does at the 1:27 mark. Then, having moved the left foot rearward, she jumps (both feet leaving the floor) and alights on the left foot, before releasing the ball.
I agree that in real time, this move is rarely called a travel. A completely clean - legal - drop-step would involve the non-pivot foot being in contact with the floor, before the pivot foot is lifted. Indeed, if that is the case, until the pivot foot touches again, it cannot be a travel.
Yes, on a normal drive to the basket, at a run, both feet are off the floor three times, without the action incurring a travel violation.
This entire sdcenario is not the main subject of the OP, in as much as a jump-stop is quite a different move.

My point is if the rules defined a jump the way you suggest, then a layup as normally performed is a travel. There's a difference between a step and a jump. It's a judgment call, but the rule doesn't require the drop step be performed as you say, it prohibits a player from hopping while keeping the pivot foot off the floor. Imagine an aborted jump shot where the player keeps it and lands on the non-pivot foot. Without this rule, that would be legal.

[APG]

Originally Posted by Rob1968

In regards to the video, 1:27 -1:49:
Take a look at 4-44-3b ... After coming to a stop and establishing a pivot foot: if the player jumps, neither foot may return to the floor, before the ball is released on a pass or try for goal.
This is what I understand to be a "drop-step", and in the video, both feet are off the floor (jump), and then the left foot returns to the floor before the ball is released on a try, thus a travel call. This move, to be legal, must have the non-pivot foot in contact with the floor, before the pivot foot is lifted. Admittedly, it is sometimes missed, due to the speed of the move.

Are you saying the move at 1:27-1:49 is a travel? First off, in real time, I would have said she landed simultaneously on both feet after gathering the ball in the air. Slowed down, the player's right foot lands first, then the left foot, thus establishing the right foot as the pivot foot. She then steps with her left foot, picks up the pivot foot, and releases the ball before the pivot foot returns to the floor. Thus a legal move.

What's the confusion here?