Travel???
 

I think this is a travel but am not sure. Player is on both knees with the ball. She lifts one knee and puts that foot on the floor so she now has one knee and toe of shoe down and the other foot down. She then passes the ball. Is this a travel? Can you consider it a pivot knee since both were down? Thanks

I agree, I believe it is a travel.

It's an attempt to stand. If it's all one motion, give her the benefit of the doubt, but if it's two separate motions, then penalise it.

No such think as "a pivot knee" (or "pivot cheek" <-- in an attempt to stop another post)

You have to judge if she's attempting to stand. I don't think it reads that way, so I'm probably letting it go.

She did not try to stand beyond described she was in the second position for at least a second before she passed the ball. Had she lifted her other knee, easy travel. Never had it happen before so I let it go.

Yeah, it doesn't seem like I would have called that a travel.

I have a travel. Attempt to get up.

I'm inclined to agree. In addition to the attempt to get up you could say the player gained an advantage by going to one knee then passing the ball since (s)he would have more balance/leverage.

Then based on my previous comment, I have a travel.

I am interested in the turn out of this play. How did she get on the floor? was she holding the ball, dribbling when she went down or did she catch the ball on her knees? I would have called travel as soon as her knees hit the floor if she went down holding the ball. If she went down dribbling then she can continue to dribble but if she stops without getting up then she either has to shoot or pass, when her foot hits the floor she attempts to get up and I would call that a travel, That's just my opinion and I am only a second year ref.If she caught it while on her knees she can pass, shoot or call a time out or start a dribble and get up. that's my interpretation of the rules.

I agree, I thought she was on her knees

Rule: 4-44-5


ART. 5

Traveling is moving a foot or feet in any direction in excess of prescribed limits while holding the ball. The limits on foot movements are as follows:

A player holding the ball:

a. May not touch the floor with a knee or any other part of the body other than hand or foot.

b. After gaining control while on the floor and touching with other than hand or foot, may not attempt to get up or stand.

4.44.5 SITUATION C:

A1 is dribbling when he/she: (a) drops to a position with a knee on the floor and then ends the dribble; or (b) drops one knee to the floor and then stands again while continuing the dribble.

RULING: The action in both (a) and (b) is legal. However, if A1 touches a knee to the floor while holding the ball, it would be traveling as A1 has touched the floor with something other than a hand or foot.

4.44.5 SITUATION D:

A1 secures possession of the ball with one knee in contact with the floor. May A1 assume a standing position without committing a traveling *violation?

RULING: It depends on what A1 does. If A1 attempts to stand up while holding the ball, a traveling violation occurs. However, if A1 starts a dribble and then rises, no violation has occurred. Also, A1 could pass, try for goal or call a time-out from that position.


Sounds like a travel to me..

The Case play cited, deals with one knee touching the floor. Obviously, to move that leg to a position with the foot touching and not the knee, is an attempt to stand up.
This does not address a player on the floor, on both knees, and changing one leg to a foot contact rather than knee contact with the floor. Some see that movement/change of position as an attempt to stand, and others do not see it as such.
I don't understand that particular Case play as relevant to the second scenario.

The opening post says on both knees with the ball, and attempts to stand . IMO this is a travel.

No, the opening post says the player starts on both knees and shifts so that only one knee stays down while the other leg is on the foot.

To me, this is not an attempt to get up until the second knee comes up. I'm not adamant either way, but I just don't see how this is an attempt to get up.

So do you think this is a travel adam or not?

Criminal Intent ...
 

If this player does anything other than start a dribble, pass, shoot, or request a timeout, anything other than just staying there, then I'm probably calling a travel. Once that knee comes off the floor, even if the player's intent is just to get a little more comfortable, not an attempt to get up, then I'm probably calling a travel. If it looks like an attempt to get up, then, in my mind, it's an attempt to get up. I'm not a mind reader.

The way I see the play in my head from the description, no I don't.

The rule doesn't list what's allowed. It lists what's prohibited, and we get the "only allowed to" based off of that list. The alleged illegal act here is an attempt to get up, but I don't see the action (shifting from two knees to one knee) as an attempt to get up (I interpret "get up" as equivalent to "stand").

If you're on two knees, putting one foot on the floor is a common first step in rising to a standing position. Based on this description, I have a travel.

Sure, it's a necessary step in rising, but it's not sufficient. It's also a common first step in maintaining one's balance without getting up, or a first step in getting a good pass thrown.

I'm comfortable waiting until they actually try to stand before calling the travel.

I think it is sufficient. They gain a more advantageous position as a result and I don't believe that is intended to be legal any more than rolling over. Plus, the fact that is has been specified that a player who is lying on their back is allowed to sit up but they list no other actions that are permitted by a player on the floor seems to imply that any other movement that raises the player's position would be illegal.

Camron, thanks. I recognize I'm in the minority here. As they say, "when it's you against the world..."

How would one stand?
 

Please explain how one would stand from a position with two knees on the ground.

Probably by taking one leg, and moving to a position where one foot is on the floor, while the other leg is still in a position with a knee on the ground.

Try it, get down with two knees on the ground and try to stand.

This was an attempt to get up, however subtle, it was an attempt to get up.
You had a travel.

There are other things that can be done with the new position, IOW, it's not solely a transition position from two knees to standing. As I stated before, it's necessary but not sufficient. Everyone acts as if the only possible thing he could be doing by shifting from two knees to one is attempting to stand. I don't get that.

Sit on two knees. Then shift to put one foot on the floor. Do you not have better balance even if you don't stand?

Although our ideas vary and Im guilty of reading to much into things. You only have a second to process and call this play.

4.44.5 SITUATION D:

A1 secures possession of the ball with one knee in contact with the floor. May A1 assume a standing position without committing a traveling *violation?

RULING: It depends on what A1 does. If A1 attempts to stand up while holding the ball, a traveling violation occurs. However, if A1 starts a dribble and then rises, no violation has occurred. Also, A1 could pass, try for goal or call a time-out from that position.

This subject is an example of the FED setting a trap, and those who read only part of it, equating two different actions, in the verbiage they use:
Note that the SITUATION refers to a player with one knee on the floor, and uses the phrase "assume a standing position."
Then, in the RULING, they change the phrasiology from "assume a standing position" to "attempts to stand."
Not only is the first phrase - "assume a standing position" - commonly understood to mean "A position in which a person is erect, on both feet" - (Reference - Webster On-line Dictionary) - but the SITUATION stated dictates that from one knee, to "attempt to stand" inherently refers to standing on both feet.
Common understanding is that whether a person is on two knees or one, they are kneeling, not standing -(Reference - Webster On-line Dictionary). Thus, to go from a kneeling position on two knees, to a kneeling position on one knee, one is still kneeling, and not standing, and has not made an "attempt to stand."

All nice, but irrelevant. An attempt doesn't have to be successful to be considered an attempt so the fact they never make it to two feet doesn't matter.

No, it doesn't have to be successful, but it does have to be an actual attempt to stand rather than an attempt to shift from two knees to one. I don't see the two as equal.

Note: I have yet to see a player go from two knees to one. I think the difference in opinions here would result in exactly one or two different calls over the career of the average official.