DVBOA...Phantom travels

[HawkeyeCubP]

I'm not calling plays 1 or 2 travels. And I think it's be just fine with my supervisors.

[canuckrefguy]

Saw all three of these in today's Ohio State/Michigan State game.

None were called.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by HawkeyeCubP

I'm not calling plays 1 or 2 travels. And I think it's be just fine with my supervisors.

The point of the discussion is not whether an official should generally be expected to call them but weather they were technically travels or not.

It is not unusual for some plays to be too close to be sure when viewed live but that doesn't meant they are not travels. It just means the typical officials just can't tell at full speed. That is OK, but, again, it still doesn't mean they are not travels.

If an official is, however, able to tell, call it, and gets it right, that doesn't make them wrong just because others are incapable of discerning what is is not a travel when it is close. That just means the others couldn't tell.

It should be the goal of all officials to call travels that are travels and not call travels that are not travels....and err on the side of calling nothing if they are unsure. To not call travels because they were not big enough travels or because some others can't tell is a slippery slope...how much is big enough. It is a lot easier to have a black and white line on travels, just like out of bounds....it either is or it isn't (whether we call it right nor not).

[HawkeyeCubP]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

To not call travels because they were not big enough travels or because some others can't tell is a slippery slope...how much is big enough. It is a lot easier to have a black and white line on travels, just like out of bounds....it either is or it isn't (whether we call it right nor not).

I don't think it's like discerning and calling OB violations. I'd offer that there a plenty of things that are technically travels that go uncalled (and I'm not talking NCAA-M vs. NCAA-W traveling emphases/lack thereof), and likely unrecognized, especially in games where players are very fast, and that those who are able to discern what should be called versus what shouldn't - much like about 75% of the rest of the game, are setting themselves apart from the herd, so to speak.

A prime example of what I'm talking about is play 1 in the OP. The basics of that play - albeit at at least 2 to 4 times the speed of the OP play - happens probably 20-30 times in almost every college game, when guards pop or weave out in a front court set and receive a pass on the top side of the perimeter. Never called a travel, nor should it be, IMO.

I'd say my stance is that some types of travels (as well as all OB violations) should be judged with a black and white line of demarcation, but not others.

[BktBallRef]

By rule, they're all technical violations of the traveling rule.

#1, When the ball is caught, the players R foot is on the floor, making it the pivot. He puts his left foot down, then steps with his right foot. Traveling.

#2, When the player sticks his pivot foot, the toe of the shoe is basically at the midpoint of the FT space. After he spins, the toe is almost on the block. IOW, he slides his foot. Traveling.

#3, Airborne player catches the ball, lands with his R foot first, then L, then steps with his R. Traveling.

I wouldn't call any of them at full speed as I think it would be guessing.

[zm1283]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

All three are travels. The only one that is hard to see with the given video angle is the post move.

#1. Ball caught with right foot down and left foot up. The left foot immediately comes down making the right foot the pivot. The right foot is lifted and moved to a new spot. Not a big travel, but a travel.

#2. Ball is caught with his right foot on the floor in the top lane space. He steps forward with his left foot making the right the pivot. The right is the lifted and he steps forward again on the right (the travel) before spinning back to the left.

#3. Ball caught in the air and landed right-left-right. Travel. The landing was close to being simultaneous but it wasn't.

I can see #1 and #3 not being called frequently and I may very well have several of those in my games that go uncalled but that doesn't mean they were not travels, just that they were missed.

I am with you on this. Technically all three of them are travels if you go straight by the book.

I would notice #1 but probably not call it in a varsity game. I would see #2 (Or hope I would) and I would call it. #3 wouldn't register on my travel radar.

[JetMetFan]

Originally Posted by HawkeyeCubP

I'd say my stance is that some types of travels (as well as all OB violations) should be judged with a black and white line of demarcation, but not others.

This would be the slippery slope Camron is talking about. If, in all three plays, we didn't judge them as travels that's one thing. We all miss violations because we may not have a good look at them. But if we decide not to call them for other reasons, that's where problems can develop.

Case in point, these plays we discussed last season:

[HawkeyeCubP]

Originally Posted by JetMetFan

This would be the slippery slope Camron is talking about. If, in all three plays, we didn't judge them as travels that's one thing. We all miss violations because we may not have a good look at them. But if we decide not to call them for other reasons, that's where problems can develop.

Case in point, these plays we discussed last season:

Most of the plays in that clip are examples of black and white travels, IMO. The last play, for example, IMO, is not something that should be called (but it's close).

[Scooby]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

1) If you make some small allowance, it's a jump stop and a legal pivot.

You may never legally pivot out of a 'jump stop'.

[APG]

Originally Posted by Scooby

You may never legally pivot out of a 'jump stop'.

It depends on your what your definition of a jump stop. There are two types of plays referred to as a jump stop.

If you gather (sorry, end the dribble for some of y'all) with a foot on the floor, jump off that foot, and land simultaneously on both feet, then no, you can't pivot. Same would apply if he gathered the ball with both feet in the air, landed on one foot, jumped off that foot and landed on both feet simultaneously.

The other type of jump stop is the one where a player gathers their dribble with both feet in the air and lands simultaneously...he may pivot with either foot in this case.

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by Scooby

You may never legally pivot out of a 'jump stop'.

Sure you can. Dribbling, end your dribble with both feet off the floor, land simultaneously land with both feet. Either can be the pivot.

[jbduke]

I think Camron nailed all three of these. I did have a problem with the first play, though, because he didn't seem to be calling the illegal move, but a legal move that followed. If you come that late with a whistle and show as little conviction as the calling official did, I'm going to look extra hard at the play.
Also, if you're going to have a whistle on that play you're setting an extremely difficult standard to measure up to consistently.

I thought the other two were obvious gets.

Regardless, if you're going to produce a video entitled "Phantom Travels," they damn sure need to be clear phantom travels.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by APG

It depends on your what your definition of a jump stop. There are two types of plays referred to as a jump stop.

If you gather (sorry, end the dribble for some of y'all) with a foot on the floor, jump off that foot, and land simultaneously on both feet, then no, you can't pivot. Same would apply if he gathered the ball with both feet in the air, landed on one foot, jumped off that foot and landed on both feet simultaneously.

The other type of jump stop is the one where a player gathers their dribble with both feet in the air and lands simultaneously...he may pivot with either foot in this case.

and, the play in question was the latter.

[OKREF]

The Rivers play is a travel. In my opinion.