A Way to Look at "Travelling"

[tref]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

I have one way of looking at traveling...which foot is the pivot?

AND did the player have possession during that time.

So many times guys call a travel based on the excess movement of the feet, with no look (backs & butts) at the status of the ball.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by tref

AND did the player have possession during that time.

So many times guys call a travel based on the excess movement of the feet, with no look (backs & butts) at the status of the ball.

This is a good point, and I'll add that so many coaches start screaming based on the same thing; especially when a player doesn't catch the ball upon first contact while he's running.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Adam

Many coaches start screaming based on the same thing; especially when a player doesn't catch the ball upon first contact while he's running.

They confuse a catch with a touch.

[tref]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

They confuse a catch with a touch.

And sometimes a touch with a catch. Ie; tapping an offensive rebound into the b/c.

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by tref

AND did the player have possession during that time.

So many times guys call a travel based on the excess movement of the feet, with no look (backs & butts) at the status of the ball.

If he isn't holding the ball, there is no pivot foot.

[tref]

You know that, I know that, BillyMac knows that, but there are some new officials out there too. Your reply could've been misinterpreted by a lesser experienced official.

The point (and not directed to you) was, don't call travels based soley on the movement of the feet when you can't see the ball.

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by tref

You know that, I know that, BillyMac knows that, but there are some new officials out there too. Your reply could've been misinterpreted by a lesser experienced official.

The point (and not directed to you) was, don't call travels based soley on the movement of the feet when you can't see the ball.

So I should have replied to your post...

"AND it wasn't a thrower during a throw-in."

...since your reply could've been misinterpreted by a lesser experienced official, since you didn't include that a thrower can't travel during a throw-in.