Syracuse-Indiana clips(s)

[OKREF]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

If you stop the video at 11 seconds, the player has both hands on the ball and the left foot on the ground (just outside the FT circle).

When the left foot touches again, it's a travel.

Exactly. This is clearly a travel, I thought it was when I saw it live.

[JetMetFan]

[OKREF]

Originally Posted by JetMetFan

If that isn't the end of a dribble, what is? Left foot on the floor. He is going to take three steps, right, left, right.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by OKREF

If that isn't the end of a dribble, what is? Left foot on the floor. He is going to take three steps, right, left, right.

Nice photo. I stand corrected.

[JRutledge]

If you have to freeze a photo determine something, then it is not as clear as you say it is.

Peace

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

If you have to freeze a photo determine something, then it is not as clear as you say it is.

Peace

Some of us, including the announcers, didn't need to freeze it.

[4-40]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Some of us, including the announcers, didn't need to freeze it.

So the announcers guessed correctly on a play that looked awkward and "video" supported it this time. It's certainly not blant enough to be as adamant as they were about it.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Some of us, including the announcers, didn't need to freeze it.

And once again, a lot of high school officials call anything looking funny to them as a travel. You even used a standard that was not rule based and now because there is a still picture that shows a foot on the ground, but we cannot see control, now I am supposed to agree with the announcers?

I have said this before, if you have to slow something down to determine something, then it is not obvious enough to call. And it was not obvious (it still isn't). And if guys are calling this, they will call ones that are not there because of how it looks and not what actually happened.

This play looks like a video I showed a while ago.

Peace

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

And once again, a lot of high school officials call anything looking funny to them as a travel. You even used a standard that was not rule based and now because there is a still picture that shows a foot on the ground, but we cannot see control, now I am supposed to agree with the announcers?

I have said this before, if you have to slow something down to determine something, then it is not obvious enough to call. And it was not obvious (it still isn't). And if guys are calling this, they will call ones that are not there because of how it looks and not what actually happened.

This play looks like a video I showed a while ago.

Peace

I agree with all the philosophy stuff you've been saying.

But, this one was obvious to me. I saw the posted play. I judged it to be a travel. Then I read the first few comments about how it wasn't. I went back for a closer look. Still a travel to me.

And, just becasue someone did (or might) call this one does NOT mean that they are guessing and might get some others wrong.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by OKREF

If that isn't the end of a dribble, what is? Left foot on the floor. He is going to take three steps, right, left, right.

Agree. Dribble ended. Pivot foot left. Travel.

[4-40]

Originally Posted by OKREF

If that isn't the end of a dribble, what is? Left foot on the floor. He is going to take three steps, right, left, right.

Clearly a travel in a still shot, but he only takes two steps (right, left). However, the second step is the pivot foot returning to the floor. To say this is clearly a travel at real-speed is a farce, in my opinion. It looked funny, but strange isn't necessarily illegal. I have no problems without a whistle on this play.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by 4-40

Clearly a travel in a still shot, but he only takes two steps (right, left). However, the second step is the pivot foot returning to the floor. To say this is clearly a travel at real-speed is a farce, in my opinion. It looked funny, but strange isn't necessarily illegal. I have no problems without a whistle on this play.

It is fine to have no whistle on this play...I can accept that as too close to call live. But, it IS a travel and not being able to see it live doesn't ever change what it was.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

It is fine to have no whistle on this play...I can accept that as too close to call live. But, it IS a travel and not being able to see it live doesn't ever change what it was.

It is a travel in your judgment, do not speak for the rest of us or claim that this has to have a call. We do not officiating in still photos and honestly I do not see a foot clearly on the floor and I do not see clear possession. It is a still photo, it is not how we call the game.

Peace

[OKREF]

Originally Posted by JetMetFan

Originally Posted by JRutledge

honestly I do not see a foot clearly on the floor and I do not see clear possession.
Peace

Really? I know we don't deal in still photos, all I'm saying is I saw it in real time

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

It is a travel in your judgment, do not speak for the rest of us or claim that this has to have a call. We do not officiating in still photos and honestly I do not see a foot clearly on the floor and I do not see clear possession. It is a still photo, it is not how we call the game.

Peace

We get it. You don't want to call travels. That's OK. You've clearly established that you will look for every reason not to call a travel, even ignoring clear facts.

Yes, it often takes judgement at full speed to make decisions on plays like this and that judgement can lead to no travel call. However, what takes judgement at full speed can sometimes be determined objectively in slow-motion and the correct ruling might disagree with what could be confidently determined at full speed.

It really isn't judgement anymore when the video and still frame evidence show everything you need to see to determine if it is or isn't a travel. At live speed, I was unsure on this one and would have not called a travel.

However, the video and the still clearly show that his left foot was on the floor (to disagree with that with the given evidence is simply preposterous) while the ball was at rest in his hand. He did not put the ball down for another dribble and didn't fumble/muff it. If, at that point, he hasn't caught it (holding it), what, by definition, is he doing with it???. And once it is caught/at rest, as it is in this play, the foot on the floor is, by definition (not judgement) the pivot.

Again, it is not unreasonable that these sorts of plays might not be caught at live speed, but it is just silly to keep claiming that these sorts plays are not travels just because they are hard to see at full speed. They're just missed....and understandably missed....but still travels.