Last seconds of Georgia at Arkansas
 

I would like a clip of the last two possessions in regulation. There was a question about a travel on the last shot that Arkansas took on a made basket. I think it was not a travel, but very close.

Peace

Video request: Arkansas game winner
 

Another travel that is "not called at this level?"

No.

Peace

I just saw the play. Player ended the dribble on the left side of the lane with back to the basket. Right foot was the pivot. Stepped to the middle of the lane with the left foot, then followed with the right returning to the floor almost all the way across the lane before the release of the shot.

It looked to me like the shot was off before his pivot foot hit the floor. But I would like to see it again. And it had nothing to do with level. The more I hear you say that, the more I think guys like you just call any thing that looks funny and says, "Well at the high school level that is a travel." I call the same travels at all levels I work. Some are very obvious, others are not. This was not obvious and if the pivot foot came down and the officials saw it that way, I think it would have been called.

Peace

Preach on.

Upon further review, the pivot actually returned to the floor and he jumped off that foot before the release. It is blocked from view at the end of the shot, but, if anything, the right foot came close to hitting the floor a second time.

I just watched - and again, hope to post before the day is out. His right foot did come down again. He wouldn't have been able to take off for the shot if it didn't. I'm not sold on a travel because of when he gathered the ball.

As for UGA's last shot at the buzzer, it appeared to be a blocking foul.

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/q0TQl07M6Vc" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/zmZgthv74tQ" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

I remain comfortable with my original position.

Travel. It was almost two travels. Right foot was the first pivot coming around on the spin move then he pivoted on the lift bringing the right around to a new spot on the floor, umping off that right foot, then almost landing on the right foot again before shooting. The timing of the release relative to the right foot coming back down, however, is not really important because he had already traveled.

Good no call.

Travel on first play, nothing on the second.

Play one is bang bang as to whether the right foot came down before the ball was released...as such, I wouldn't called a travel and wouldn't expect it to be called a travel (and for the matter, I have left foot as the pivot foot as I have a gather with both feet on the floor).

Play two, wish we had another angle...if I HAD to guess, I'd say it was a blocking foul.

Irrelevant....he had already traveled long before that.

I have the gather with both feet on the floor...followed by a step with the right foot...so it's relevant IMO.

That first play is a travel - and not a ticky-tack one, either.

Good no-call on the second play - defender is in his position before shooter leaves the floor, but only minimal side contact. Play on.

That is what I have too.

Thanks for posting.

Peace

Travel. You cannot play defense when the ball handler is allowed to pick up then replant his pivot foot.

No call on next play.

Show me the definition of "gather"? All we've got is holding the ball or not.

At the point shown below, his dribble had ended by catching the ball in one hand (if he dribbled again after this it would be a carry). It doesn't take two hands on the ball to hold the ball.

http://cbrust.smugmug.com/photos/i-x...-xKbtrCn-M.jpg

The left foot is off the floor making his right foot the pivot when the left foot touches.

To allow the foot movement in this play is just not intended by the rules. It might be fair to say that some, even many, officials might not see it and call it, but it is incorrect to say it isn't a travel.

This really wasn't close to being legal.

You cannot take a picture and then make assumptions based only on the picture. Sorry Camron but that almost never works as what happened right before or I could make a case that the player had not gathered yet.

Peace

No assumptions here about anything. This picture is just the highlight of what the video clearly shows.

Gathering the ball is an overall action, not a split second moment. All the picture shows is a ball kind of in the hand, but not necessarily in control or the moment a pivot foot or pivot feet have been established. Like I tell fans, you cannot show me a picture and tell the story of what was called or not called. Why is this picture so special?

Peace

The picture appears to show the ball resting in the player's hand with the right foot firmly on the floor, thus establishing it as the pivot. Yes, a still picture such as this can be deceptive. He could have been bobbling the ball.

But, in this case, we've seen the entire video. It isn't. He wasn't.

The key word, "appears." I do not see any definite control and I would not consider that action alone a gather until the players brought the ball with both hands on some level. And once again, was this picture taken after the gather or before the gather. Either way if your argument is that this picture proves something, it does not in my mind. It might have been a travel, but it was not called, so someone judged it was not illegal whether you agree with the call or not.

Peace

No rule support for this. It is possible to catch the ball in one hand. In this particular case, the ball comes to rest in the one hand. Player has both hands on it a split second later.

Please. :rolleyes:

There is no rules support that what was shown in the picture was control of the ball either. Better yet, where is the definition for catch in the rulebook? And in the video he brought both hands together on the ball as he was spinning.

Not everything needs a definition to know when to determine control takes place and it is still a judgment call. I do not see definitive control in this picture and why pictures are terrible to show what took place with a game in constant motion. If you need rules support for everything, then officiating is going to be very difficult. You even said your self this could have been a bobble.

Peace

At some moment, the dribble ends. How does it end? It ends by the player catching the ball with one or both hands. In the above case, when does it end? Would you think is legal for the player in the still shot to then turn the ball back over and dribble again? No....at least I hope not. Why? Because he has ended the dribble by catching the ball. And to dribble again would be an illegal dribble (also known as a carry...which only happens when they hold the ball mid-dribble).

There is no such thing as gathering and the rules do not go anywhere near what you are trying to suggest. There is nothing about two hands being required to be holding the ball. There is also no magical window between when the dribble ends and when the player starts holding the ball. It transitions directly from one to the other.

Dance around it all you want, but you're making up your own rules when you bring "gather" and "two hands" into what is required to be holding the ball.

The moment the dribble ends is when the foot restrictions begin.

Well considering that a dribble is done with one hand legally and players tend to have to "stop" the dribble on some level while using one hand. But since he brings the ball to both hands, that is the time I would consider more of a gather. Before that time he is attempting to gather the ball.

And there is such a thing as gathering as it is when someone is trying to catch the ball. Just because you do not have a pretty little definition does not mean it would not apply. And when we have no definition of a catch in basketball either like other sports, then when they actually catch the ball with your logic also is up for debate. As I said, I see both feet on the floor when the finally catches the ball and either foot can be the pivot at that time.

Sometimes we have to officiate and always expecting every rule to cover all situations and examples is silly.

Peace

The point remains that the dribble ends, by definition, the moment the holding begins. The dribble is stopped by "holding" the ball in one or both hands. To introduce anything else is, by rule, just not correct.

You can't introduce football concepts where a catch needs to be defined (because whether the pass is complete or not depends on it) into basketball where it just doesn't apply.

If the player committed a foul at that moment, would it be a player control foul? If you say yes, that means they are either holding the ball or dribbling the ball. There are no other choices. If you're not going to let them dribble again, that means the dribble has ended and they are holding the ball. If you say no, then you have introduced even more made-up rules that will require another discussion.

I did not say anything about football, just pointed out that other sports have a specific definition of a catch. For all you know I could have been using a baseball standard.

Isn't this why it is called judgment? I have not seen anything you have said that is solidly backed up by any rule as well. Actually you have been giving your opinion the same way I have. And if in live time I can tell that closely if there is control with one hand in examples like this, then it will be a first. Usually players bring the ball as a way to control the ball with both hands. Maybe you are watching different players than I am, but rarely is that done with just one hand. And you even said there is no such thing as a "gather" but you do not seem to know what is commonly used in that example.

We will just have to disagree on this one and I am fine with that fact.

Peace

Don't confuse the situation with gather...that is universally used in reference to a shooting foul or not a shooting foul. I've have never heard it used in the context of traveling.

And you have once again avoided the main question that will settle the situation....can that player in the still shot above legally turn that ball over and dribble again? Yes or no? If so, why?

I am really not concerned with what you universally have heard or not heard. I just am giving and example of when the player stopped his dribble. Honestly this is about a judgment call and trying to discribe why we have a travel or not a travel. Again not sure how someone stops a dribble without gathering the ball. And this player did so to shoot, so not sure why when that gather took place would all of a sudden not apply?

Why do people like you always want others to answer things the way you want them to? I have not avoided anything, I just disagree with you. I do not have a travel on that part of the play, it is that simple. If you do, then you will have to live with your call just like I will have to live with my call.

Peace

Why do you want to avoid a simple question? Are you afraid that it will just expose your error? You say it is a travel. Fine. Back it up with a rule instead of made up mumbo jumbo.

Better yet, just answer the very simple question. Did the dribble end yet or not?

If so, how does it end? If not, explain why? This isn't a hard. Any rookie official should be able to answer that fundamental question.

He Rested On The Seventh Day From All His Work ...
 

I'm sure. The dribble ends when:
a. The dribbler catches or causes the ball to come to rest in one or both hands.
b. The dribbler palms/carries the ball by allowing it to come to rest in one or both hands.

Just thought of something. Several years ago, there was a kid around here who had a stroke before birth. (or something like that) He basically did everything with one hand, and by the way, was an outstanding player. So I guess he never "gathered" the ball, so he could never be called for traveling.

Use the Google to look up "reductio ad absurdum."

When I officiate that kid, I will worry about what he does. In this play he brought the ball together with both hands.

Can we talk about plays in the real world, not some special situation that none of us will see?

Peace

I think there is video in this thread about this play. Go look at the video. I think that will answer your question about what I think of this play. If not, get a better computer.

Peace

"The"? :eek:

And: nice use of reductio. :)

It was intentional.

George Bush uses 'The Google' - YouTube

Ha! I was unaware of the reference. That's almost as good as the late Sen. Stevens referring to the internet as a series of tubes.

Funny Bush couldn't remember the name of "Google Maps" in that context. :eek:

Just like he said, "The internets" as well in a press conference. Then again I am a political junkie so that kind of thing is common knowledge for me and I got the reference immediately.

Peace

I don't think you heard me correctly: I stated that I was unaware of the reference. I did not mention you or your activities.

The point is that if you were someone that paid attention to certain things, you would have gotten the reference (if you pay attention to political and pop culture commentary). Remember you gave Rich crap by his wording and then acted like he was unaware of what he stated. Heck you can take my actions out of this, you just did not realize he was making a joke. ;)

Peace

I did not "give Rich crap," nor did I suggest in any way that he was unaware of anything.

Congratulations on having your finger on the pulse of everything in the universe.

Still avoiding the question I see. Again, can he dribble again or not? A simple yes or no will do.

The point was touching the ball with both hands might or might not be significant. In the case at hand, it isn't.

That is why it is a judgment call. We all do not have te same judgment or standard of what is to be called or not called.

Peace