bainsey The question is whether the hand contact caused the travel, therefore resulting in a hand check foul. I could easily go with that.
just another ref bainsey wroteThe question is whether the hand contact caused the travel, therefore resulting in a hand check foul. I could easily go with that. The hand check did not cause the travel, in my opinion, but it doesn't have to to be a foul.
rockyroad just another ref wroteThe hand check did not cause the travel, in my opinion, but it doesn't have to to be a foul. It did not CAUSE the travel in the sense that the defender did not push the ball handler backward. But did it CAUSE the travel in the sense that in order to start his move to the basket the ball handler had to step backward to get away from the illegal contact? I just didn't understand why the previous poster would put the travel call ahead of the hand check call in his prioritized list of calls.
just another ref rockyroad wroteI just didn't understand why the previous poster would put the travel call ahead of the hand check call in his prioritized list of calls. I suppose the argument could be made that there was no hand check foul to call. (minimal contact, no advantage gained, etc.) I don't see how anyone could say there was no travel.
OKREF That is an easy obvious travel. Also when the obvious hand check wasn't called, no way he was calling the obvious push off
MD Longhorn JRutledge wroteI have a handcheck long before anything else. PeaceThis. A long, 3-second handcheck that actually pushes the offensive player back a bit. But if the HC doesn't happen, then hell yes that's a PC.
MD Longhorn zm1283 wroteThis would be a travel in any game I work, but that's just me. If I happened to miss the travel, I would hope I would get the hand check or the PC.So we don't think the travel was CAUSED by the HC? I do.
MD Longhorn just another ref wroteI suppose the argument could be made that there was no hand check foul to call. (minimal contact, no advantage gained, etc.) I don't see how anyone could say there was no travel. Literally LOL at this. I don't see how anyone could say there was no advantage gained by a continuous push that forced the dribbler to travel.
JetMetFan Appendix III (edited to deal with this scenario) Ball Handler or Dribbler a. Definition. A ball handler or dribbler is any player with player control holding or dribbling) outside the lane area, either facing or with her back to the basket. An arm-bar is contact with the forearm that is away from the body. b. Legal activity. The following are examples of legal activity: 1. A one hand “measure up” by the defense. This means, one hand (front or back of the hand) contacting the ball-handler/dribbler and immediately removing that hand. Also known as a “hot stove” touch. This is the ONLY hand contact that is legal by the defense and is considered incidental. c. Illegal contact. A foul shall be called when: 2. The defender places a hand (front or back of the hand) on the ball-handler/dribbler and keeps it on. 3. The defender contacts the ball-handler/dribbler more than once with the same hand or with alternating hands. Which is a long way of saying an actual push isn't necessary. If a defender leaves a hand on it's assumed (s)he is either pushing or holding.
JugglingReferee I can see the hand check not getting called. The travel should be called. Allowing that footwork without a call is blasphemy. As far as the foul goes, that's definitely a PC foul.