Quinnipiac/Marist (W)...Travel/Block/PC? (video)
 

What's your call?

<iframe width="853" height="480" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/sgZ90hutpn8?rel=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

PC, but it is very close.

That's a block, all day, every day. And it most definitely is not a travel at any point.

I agree. She never managed to establish LGP. And no way is that a travel.

Agreed.

The travel call is definitely wrong.
Block/Charge is close, so I watched it a couple of times and stoppped the video at the crucial moments (when the offensive player lands, when the defender obtains ILGP, and the moment of contact). The defender actually does obtain legal position prior to the contact. If anyone wishes to post still pics, all will see that this is true. The offensive player then proceeds to go through the defender's space while attempting to dribble. Correct call is a PC.

Are you ruling the play to be a block, because you felt the defender wasn't fully in the path of the ballhandler? It looks to me that she did have both feet down, facing the opponent, before the contact.

Regarding the travel call - I've heard and seen several officials use the travel as a sort of "nuetral" call on such close calls . . . something I find quite distasteful.

Block...defender was moving towards the offensive player all the way to contact making the question about LGP a moot point.

And not even close to a travel.

+1

Pictures added
 

Ask and ye shall receive...

http://i59.tinypic.com/oh6xpe.jpghttp://i59.tinypic.com/r91hyb.jpg


http://i57.tinypic.com/95qu8m.jpghttp://i62.tinypic.com/14myl4z.jpg


http://i60.tinypic.com/zilnom.jpghttp://i60.tinypic.com/10hpttu.jpg

Add me to the PC votes

Eh, it's a tie. Tie goes to the runner...err offensive player.

still photographs show defender moving into A1

Exactly. If you look at the series of photos, she's moved forward.

Block at live speed.

Block in slo-mo.

Block in frame by frame stills.

I'm with Bob. Looks to me like she stops any significant forward movement, but I'm not married to either call.

Either way, a travel is a horrible decision here.

And I'm Not Married To My Coffee Mug ...
 

They allow that now? Man. I thought that I lived in a liberal state (and, for the most part, proud of it)?

I'm amazed at how many people use a travel to avoid making a tough block/charge decision. Like I've said to others, film don't lie. It may look like a travel if you completely ignore the contact, but that doesn't make the call any less wrong.

Truth is that some of these plays are close to 50/50 calls and the official on the spot, given good training, will just go with an initial instinct, and those of us sitting at home will pick the call apart.

My guess is all three officials took a good look at the video on this one after it was over (they've all been observers at camps I've attended). My first thinking when I saw the play was they may have pre-gamed "if someone hits the floor, let's make sure we have a whistle." Again, I'm just guessing here but I'm sure that's something we've all heard at one time or another.

I just realized the call made was a travel. IMO, OUCH!!!

That's way close, but it is in no way a travel.

Block. Why are they not wearing white?

Because they do not have to.

Peace

Block is what I think I'd have at game speed. Too much forward movement by the defense IMO, although I'm having trouble reconciling that from the endline view blue stopped her forward movement and after the collision is moving backward (to and through?).

Straight-lined travel call? She should get fired for making this call. Jus' kiddin' JD, jus' kiddin'. The travel is a cop out, though. Maybe the C should have button hooked? Is this even a 3 whistle technique? I'm stuck in 2 whistle purgatory...

Having looked at this in every way I can, I've got a PC. At the time of contact, the defender's feet are so far in front of her torso, the only way she could continue forward, and possibly into the ballhandler, would be to sit down.

PC I would call. It looks like the offensive player slams into and runs over the defensive player. The defensive player is standing between the basket and the basketball. It does not look like a travel violation at all. Catch pass start dribble no travel.

Put me down for a PC.

PC here too

Block

That, in combination with where she came from, pretty much tells you she (specifically her torso) was moving forward. She jumped forward into that position but her torso was still coming up over her feet. It is probably impossible for a person to get their feet out like that otherwise.

Finally watched this on the computer instead of my phone. I still have a PC.

I see two feet down and in the path establishing her LGP. I don't think she gets a chance to move her torso forward before she's contacted.

I'm in the BLOCK camp, but I could live with a PC.

Travel call is awful here. I'd love to hear his thought process as to how he came up with it.

At a college women's camp two years ago, a D-1 clinician said, "Try not to put a crooked number on the scoreboard."

The translation was, if you can find a travel or out-of-bounds violation, that is preferable to calling a foul.

There remain many "expectations" of officials that do not fully match the rule book.

As JetMet said, there is a prevailing attitude "if someone hits the floor, let's make sure we have a whistle." It does not require illegal contact for this whistle, simply an expectation from coaches and conference coordinators that "train wrecks" and other plays with bodies on the floor MUST be accompanied by a whistle.

Are you trying to make an argument for putting turnovers on the scoreboard :rolleyes: ?

Another point that supports a conclusion opposite the conclusion you made.

Getting two feet down in such a movement pretty much guarantees that the torso is still going to be moving forward to come up over the feet before they can get stopped.

Except in this case I cannot see any forward movement by her torso so no I don't think it supports that at all. I'm saying she didn't have the chance to even start moving her torso forward before being contacted.

If her torso wasn't moving forward, she would be falling backwards. The movement you suggest isn't possible. You can't jump forward with your feet without your torso following.

I just watched the video again. Her torso is not moving forward at contact. It actually looks like she's starting to fall backwards when she's contacted.

At any rate I do not have her moving into the dribbler.

I can buy that where you have marginal contact or an oob/push near a sideline or endline. This was a good collision on a drive. Travel just feels wrong on this one.

I can buy this. The key for me is, "If you can find..." No matter how hard I look, I can't find it here. I don't even think the most trigger-happy travel-calling official among us could find a travel on the tape.

That is only because the opponents torso was there to prevent her from going forward anymore.

Bring versatility in to the discussion here. Can a player be in a legal position with their feet not below their torso?

Block

I don't agree but I'm not going to belabor the point any more. We simply see this play differently. :)

The fact that the contact is to her torso makes this close enough for me on her verticality. If she had contacted an outstretched leg first then I think this could be a consideration.

Put me in the PC group, but I don't think you would catch a lot of flak for a block here either.

Definitely not a travel.

My reaction watching the film full speed was block all the way. D looks to be coming forward. Travel is such a cop out.

I'm in the PC camp, but I would tolerate a block call with a good explanation as to why it's a block. It's that close.

I'm going block. I don't think the defense is completely in the path as the offense's path is not directly to the basket but more towards the end line. To me this puts the offense's head and shoulders past the defense. I do believe it is close though.