Traveling
 

Hey Guys,
I follow this board, but don't chime in much. But I wanted to get your thoughts on this:

It seems to me that the blatant lack of travel calls at all levels is seriously and adversley affecting the game of BB. There are various ways that one can travel, but the rule that I have in mind is really very easy to see and call. But we don't. Rule 4.3.C (NFHS) states, "the pivot foot may not be lifted before the ball is released to start a dribble."

This happens ALL THE TIME. Watch any college game and you will see this violation occur numerous times. It happens so often, and is never called, that we don't even think of it as a violation. But it is, plain and simple. I would estimate it happens more often than fouls--i.e., on average 40 plus times a game. Just watch a game and start counting and you will see what I mean. Yes, some (though certainly not all) of the violations are 40 feet from the basket and thus "no advantage is gained." But I am beginning to think that if we simply enforced this one rule consistently (and it would not be hard to do), the entire game of basketball would be changed for the better. The offense would not gain such a huge advantage on drives to the basket. There would be fewer fouls as defenders would not be put in obviously disadvantaged spots. Offensive players would have to show more skill - and probably more passing and teamwork, rather than all the dribble drives. In short, it would be a much better, and more fun game to play and officiate.

Because we have gotten to the point where this rule has been totally disregarded, it would take a massive top-down effort to enforce it again. I am certainly not advocating that we as officials take it upon ourselves to start calling it.

Thoughts?

If you doubt my assertions about the frequency of this violation, please just watch any game and look for this violation on every touch. Then start counting. The pivot cannot be lifted BEFORE the ball is released for a dribble.

I think the goal for most experienced officials are to call the obvious, not to call the minor violation. I would agree that technically there are violations missed, but not necessarily missed violations. Also traveling is the most inconsistent call in the game of basketball IMO. There are always plays that I think to my self, "Did that just happen?" I do not want to call those kinds of violations on the regular basis, I wan to call the "OMG....he traveled" violations. I know other officials that feel the same way as I do. And there are others that focus so much on calling everything they see, they call things that technically did not take place. After all this is where judgment comes into play. Not everyone has the same judgment.

Peace

Thanks JRutledge,
The philosophy that you outline is no doubt the one adopted by most officials today (call the OMG, everyone saw that, obvious travel call). But that is precisely my point: that philosophy is doing serious damage to the beauty of the game of BB because offensive players can such an advantage. Even on the specific plays where they travel and don't gain an advantage, it still gives them more leeway/freedom on what they can do - which ultimately puts the defense in a nearly impossible position, which leads to the absurd number of foul calls (about 1 per minute at all levels - is there any other sport that has that ridiculous ratio: can you imagine a footbal game with 50 penalties - how fun would that be to watch or play or officiate).

So it become a vicious cycle. We dont call travels; therefore we have to call more fouls. Then, since we are already blowing the whistle all the time for fouls, we don't want to interrupt the game with "ticky tack" travel calls. But if the travel rule were enforced, then we would not have to call all the fouls.

One other thought, per my earlier comments, the violation in which the players picks up the pivot foot before releasing the ball for a dribble is NOT one of those "did that just happen" plays. It is very easy to see if you simply pay attention and concentrate.

I totally disagree that there is serious damage done to the game because a minor violation that is hardly seen is missed or not called. For one I have yet to see an official get all those anyway.

I also do not think that calls that are not made are as consious or deliberate. I think many are just tough to see and you do not want to call what you "think" happen or cannot explain it. I see too many officials, especially at the HS level just call any action that is funny a travel. Or call the carry where they only see a hesitation, not the positioning of the ball. I do not know how many times I see a legal jump stop and all of a sudden a whistle. I do not think this is runing the game at all. It think the game just fast and hard to see everything. We are human after all and we make mistakes. I think too often people like to sit on their couch and complain about what they think they see and do not look at it from the perspective on the floor. I just saw a game of mine online and wanted to see my calls and if they were there. I saw some good things and I saw some bad things even in my game. I try my best to get all the obvious things and sometimes I missed some plays or was not as deliberate as I wanted to have things called.

The game is fine. Video has helped many of us get better with these calls. I know I have been helped to see myself on tape more often with all the formats games are broadcast.

Peace

Even granting your dubious premise that this happens all the time, I disagree that your conclusion follows. It's not ruining the game.

You might ask yourself how likely it is that you're right about this and dozens of highly paid professional officials are habitually getting it wrong in every game they work. Everyone misses a call now and then, but you're suggesting much worse.

I would encourage you to appreciate the game at higher levels the way that it's called. It sounds as if watching games is extremely stressful for you, and that's not good for your health.

Just my opinion. :)

Thanks for the thoughts. But I am still failing to make my point. I am not saying that we are "missing" these calls or getting them "wrong. I am saying that this particular play happens so often that we do not even think of it as violating a rule. And to repeat: this is a very easy call to make: You find the pivot fit and if that foot moves before the ball is released on a dribble, you call the violation.

Watching games is not stressful for me. And speaking of watching games, and the game of BB being "fine," one might at least ask about the abysmal state of the NBA. Even CBB attendance and TV ratings are down. Now, of course, I am not suggesting that it's all because of failure to apply the rules. But I do think they game of BB would be much better if there were not 40 uncalled violations in every game.

I'm assuming you meant to place a smiley face after this sentence.

Personally, when I get a chance to break down a game I see more incorrectly called travels than missed travels.

Ratings for the NBA have been up he past 3-4 years FYI...

I got to completely disagree with your initial post. No one is complaining about what may be a technical travel that has to be caught in slow motion. In fact, I'd say the game is "ruined" when officials start calling plays that are legal, travels...often times because it "looked funny" which happens too much at the high school level.

Oh well. I guess we aren't gonne be on the same page here. This is not a "guess" or a "play that looks funny" or a play "that is hard to see" or a play "that requires slow motion to see." It happens everywhere all the time, in broad daylight, in regular speed, and it's plain to see. But we simply don't think of it as a violation because it is never called. And if it were, it would change the game of BB--and I belive for the better.

Maybe I will get someone who is tech savvy to help me put together a video.

Then with all due respect, you are not breaking down the game correctly, at least if we are applying the rule as written

You believe a game would be improved if 40 additional traveling violations were called in every game.

That's an additional violation and whistle every minute of every game.

That's insane.

Again, no one wants officials to start calling every single technical travel in a game which I'm convinced are some of these plays that you are wanting to see called....same as no one realistically wants 3 seconds called the very second the count hits 3.

I'm sorry, but you can't speak for games that anyone here is working. It might just be possible that you're breaking the film down incorrectly rather than everyone else involved in basketball everywhere.

And two weeks into the season I've seen more phantom travels than missed travels

The only travel I see consistently ignored is in the low post with the big man's back to the basket. While holding the ball with both feet on the floor, he will step to the middle of the lane or the endline and then complete the move by stepping with the second foot (pivot foot). Traveling.

Shaquille O'Neal got away with it for years and it's trickled down to college and HS.

That one and the two pivot spin move are the ones I get fan grief for calling. More often than not, fans are wanting the whistle when I either can't tell or the player was clearly legal.

Yep, I would have to agree that this is the travel that is missed most. And the travel that is incorrectly called the most is the one out on the perimeter when something "looks funny".

And let's not forget the catch and two step to the 3 point arc.

My pet peeve is the travel that is called when the player isn't HOLDING the ball.

Number One With A Bullet ...
 

When asked, many officials point to the block/charge as their most difficult call. Although the "surprise" block/charge is still a difficult call for me, it's the travel, or no travel, call that is, by far, the most difficult call for me. Block/charge is in a distant second place.

Though they only got about to actually changing the wording in the rule book around 2008-2009, the move you describe (ball gathered with with foot on the floor, step with the opposite foot, then step again with the other foot) has been legal by interpretation in the NBA during a lot of Shaq's career, if I remember correctly. Definitely a travel at the lower levels.

Huge pet peeve of mine as well. I hate that call as it clearly does not understand the premise of traveling in the first place, player control.

Peace

Got to agree 100 percent with you and BBR...makes it especially tough if you have a partner that calls this a travel, and then when the same play happens you correctly no call the play.

Even worse is the play in front of you that you no-call and your partner comes across and gets.

You have no idea what experience any one and certainly have no idea what BNR's background is in breaking down tape. That is a rather condescending statement to suggest that your ability is better than others and you even admit you are not tech savvy. Many of us here not only deal with video extensively, we break down video here all the time. And if your suggestion is to call 40 more travels, that makes me really think it would be a nightmare to watch your games. I know I call my share of travels, but no where near 10 I call in just a single game. Calling 40 would be excessive.

Peace

Uh, that is my point. If this rule were enforced, players would learn to play the game how it was meant to be played. Then there would not be 40 traveling violations. But, as I stated clearly, this would have to be something done from the top down--a major POE.

Respectfully, you are missing my point. I am not suggesting that we call 40 travels. I am simply making the observation that there are numerous traveling violations each game on this one, easy-to-call rule alone (pivot foot lifted before ball released on dribble). And the setting aside of this rule is compromising the integrity of the great game of BB.

The integrity of the game?

Please.

I routinely make this call when it occurs. What I don't do is guess if I don't see it clearly.

Exactly.

There aren't.

I'm curious. How long have you been officiating?

It has been a majot POE in NCAAW for the past sevarl years. Then, this year, it was determined that officials did such a good job on getting the travels, that things that weren't travels were being called. So, now the POE is "when in doubt, it isn't". At that level, at least, I disagree with your premise.

If JRut is saying that experienced officials are sticking to just calling the obvious travels and you are saying that the travels you see being called are more likely to be incorrect, then would it be safe to conclude that something isn't quite adding up and that there may be a need to go back to the fundamentals of the travelling violation?

I agree with many officials that say that getting the pivot foot is 99% of the battle and getting the pivot truly isn't that difficult to determine....

Not that I can speak for everyone everywhere, but I know with FIBA rules the last few years in Canada the footwork issue has been a major POE. Particularly at high levels (college, high level club, etc) if the player does not cross over step, but rather blast off strong side with the dominant pivot foot its almost automatically a travel. Step across the body to add time to release the ball or be perfect on the take off or its automatic.

When players come up to play in CIS games from the states they'll get called for 7-10 travels a game until they learn how to catch and attack with the crossover step.

It is the same rule as NFHS in regards to the back foot coming up but the interpretation has become that unless it is obviously not a travel to call it as one.

This makes it sound that FIBA has a completely different idea on pivoting and traveling than was intended in the game of basketball. Makes me like FIBA even less than I already did.

I don't know about that. There are a lot of travels that go uncalled here. I see them but I don't call them because others don't call them. I'm not going to be a pioneer. They used to get called decades ago. The USA application of traveling is pretty lax.

Wow, so finally, some people are hearing what I am saying. Yes, it is exactly as you say: when a player goes strong side, instead of crosings over, it would be an automatic travel (if we are applying the rules). And yep, as you say, numerous travels per game.

No, apparently FIBA is simply enforcing the standard, proper rules, so that the game of BB can be played the way it was intended.

If you feel so strongly about it, I would suggest you call every single play that you see that you think is traveling.

Good luck. Let us know how it goes.

PS - Still curious how long you've been officiating.

My Take on It, Thus Far
 

Served as clinician at 5-1/2 hours of JV level scrimmages today with about seven officials being observed. Large-school JV, which is, around here anyway, similar to small-school varsity.
With the issue of this thread in my mind as I intently observed today, I've come to several possible conclusions:
1) I'm blind and part of the alleged problem
2) This is a regional thing and it's just not an issue around here
3) It's a problem for only varsity level and higher

I just didn't see it.
Varsity schedule kicks in this week. I'll remain alert to the issue as I launch into the season.

But as with any clarion call to be alert to something, I'll keep my eyes peeled. As much as that hurts like the dickens.

This might be true if the FIBA guidelines posted had any basis in the rules.

People hear what you're saying...just a majority of people (so far) don't agree with your premise.

I am not stupid enough to be a pioneer. It would have to be done top down--it would be foolish (and useless) to go on a crusade.

I have been officiating 6 years. I've worked everything but a state championship (have no desire to do anything above hs).

Wahr do "when a player goes strong side" and "instead of crosings over" mean as it applies to the travel rule?

If you believe this as written, then it's clear you don't understand the traveling rule.

The difference doesn't exist in the rules, just as a POE about making sure the back foot is not lifted prior to releasing the dribble.

Maybe because of the amount of contact allowed in FIBA games on the perimeter, maybe because of increasing explosiveness of athletes. When players don't cross over step the timing of the ball coming out of the hand and the back foot lifting is very close and often late.

Now traditionally, if its not clearly a travel then we haven't called it. Canada Basketball found internationally that when teams played we were being called on anything not a cross over that was close.

As a result after looking at film and consulting with officials and sport scientists they found that under review a number of no call travels were clearly travels when you slowed them down but at speed were so bang bang the officials couldn't make it out clearly. As a result the trend has become unless it is a crossover or it is not clearly ok to call it travel. They don't feel like a player can consistently step by defender, keep them on body, keep on balance, and get the ball released before the back foot comes up (biomechanic problems). So to promote the footwork Canada Basketball wanted to eliminate the the disproportionate number of no calls benifiting the offense and to prepare our athletes for the game the way it was being called at international competitions.

If you think about it like a charge/block (i know violations are different from fouls but hear me out) its not maybe a charge or maybe a block. It is a block or it is a charge. Lots of time we may have a no call because of a lack of disadvantage. Every time the offensive player takes off to beat a defender proper footwork by the offense is what allows the defense to anticipate/space/react. So the take off is either a travel or its not. So we are asked to call travel if we are not absolutely sure it wasn't. Unless you are sure the defender trying to take the charge got there in time then they weren't at its a block. Unless you are sure they didn't travel on the take off then they did.

It has caused a lot of confusion for players and coaches at all levels, since pivot foot theory has always been a personal decision of programs and coaches and not promoted top-down. The local clubs and associations feel the rule interp/ application is penalizing clubs and people that won't teach two foot stop and cross over on take off. As a part time official, part time howler monkey I've got mixed feelings. At the national and college level it has cleaned up the footwork issues and most people have adapted well. At the lower levels there is a lot of conflict between calling the game the way the rule is being interpretted and having youth games with huge numbers of travels called as most youth coaches/ school teams aren't coached by people using most current and up to date methods.

Sounds about right. When I had 5 or 6 years of experience, I thought every single possible infraction of the rules needed to be called, too.

NCAA Video Bulletin #3 just came out. Only 1 travelling play. Official incorrectly calls a travel.

John Adams quote: "The cautionary tale here is, unless you are sure it is travelling, it's not

I would estimate that a crew I'm working with will have, on average, one to two traveling calls per game.....for the exact reason in bold above. Game management is a part of the equation too, though.

Well John is a direct threat to the integrity of the wonderful game of basketball.

Now that is funny. :D

Peace