Davidson v. Louisville
 

As requested:

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/yUWKsbf6wvQ" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Nothing....once the momentum of the dive ceased, there was no additional movement.

And I DO believe that would be a travel if the player had started in that position without any momentum and then rolled over of their own volition.

I agree and thought that while watching the game live.
It goes to show how some of these decisions can go either way and be correct.
There will be several who deem this a travel.

Not a travel - not at all.

I'm of the opinion that I don't see how it is not a travel.

Lands on the ball, tucks it into his chest and then rolls over. Also once he is on his side he moves from that position to a sitting position.

I don't know if there's a difference between NFHS and NCAA rules regarding rolling over and momentum.

In NFHS, rolling over is a travel, but sliding with momentum is not. Does momentum apply to rolling over (either rule set)?

Under NCAA rules, your opinion would be incorrect.

A.R. 132 - Is it traveling when a player: ...(3) Gains control of the ball while sliding on the playing court and then, because of momentum, rolls or slides, after which the player passes or or starts a dribble before getting to his or her feet?

RULING: (3) No. The player may pass, shoot, start a dribble, or call a timeout. Once the player has the ball and is no longer sliding, he or she may not roll over. When flat on his or her back, the player may sit up without violating.

The rule basically restricts movement after the momentum has ceased. Once the player's momentum stopped, he was sufficiently on his backside that he could legally sit up.

I do agree...
 

After watching the replays, I agree with others that this is not a travel. He still had momentum when he gathered the ball into his chest and was still in his dive when he rolled over.

I will file this one away as a good reference for future game situations.

The NFHS "sliding" point is in a case play...which means it is an example of the types of plays they want to be legal, not an exhaustive list of plays that are legal. The principle is that hustle plays to get a lose ball are intended to be legal....they want players to dive to the floor to get the ball...and the stuff that comes directly from diving to get it should not be considered illegal....slide or tumble.