Todd Von Sossan

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Is this somebody I should have heard of? We got an instructive e-mail sent out by association brass this week and he was the writer. Part of it was about traveling. Started out solid enough:

The prescribed limits described for traveling differ slightly depending on if the player who catches the ball has both feet on the playing court, one foot on the playing court, or is airborne and has no feet on the playing court.

But then, later in the same article, it says, among other things:

On a drive to the basket, when a player ends his dribble and collects the ball, he is permitted 2 steps prior to releasing the ball on a shot or a pass. Count the steps: 1-2 is legal; 1-2-3 is not. If you get to 3 and the offensive player is still holding the ball, call a traveling violation.


Anybody else got a problem with this?

I also have a problem with it. rule clearly says pivot foot can be lifted but not returned to the floor before shoot or pass. others talked a few weeks ago about not counting steps just sighting this provision. if you are going to count i think the correct number is 1.5. end dribble with right foot on floor (pivot foot). step forward with left (1 step) bring right, pivot foot, up in air forward but release ball before it hits ground, the .5. if that right foot hits before i release the ball that is 2 steps and illegal. pivot foot was lifted and returned to the floor before release of ball.

[Nevadaref]

With the speed of the athletes playing the D1 men's game the officials often have a difficult time discerning the location of the player's feet when a dribble is ended on a drive to the basket. Was one foot on the floor or not?

I believe that this fellow is simply attempting to give a visual cue for officials in this circumstance. If the official counts two feet striking the floor after the end of the dribble, the movement may be legal or illegal depending upon whether the dribble was ended while the player was airborne or had one foot in contact with the court. So he seems to be advocating that only if an official is able to count three consecutive steps in such situations can one be certain that a travel has occurred and the violation should then be called.

While the step-counting method isn't part of the rule, it can be a useful tool for an official judging such situations on court, if applied properly.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

With the speed of the athletes playing the D1 men's game the officials often have a difficult time discerning the location of the player's feet when a dribble is ended on a drive to the basket. Was one foot on the floor or not?

I believe that this fellow is simply attempting to give a visual cue for officials in this circumstance. If the official counts two feet striking the floor after the end of the dribble, the movement may be legal or illegal depending upon whether the dribble was ended while the player was airborne or had one foot in contact with the court. So he seems to be advocating that only if an official is able to count three consecutive steps in such situations can one be certain that a travel has occurred and the violation should then be called.

While the step-counting method isn't part of the rule, it can be a useful tool for an official judging such situations on court, if applied properly.

It's something I use on spin moves...if I hear that 3rd step, then I have a travel.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

With the speed of the athletes playing the D1 men's game the officials often have a difficult time discerning the location of the player's feet when a dribble is ended on a drive to the basket. Was one foot on the floor or not?

That, of course, is the problem. And if you can't tell for sure, you have nothing. But to flatly state "he gets two steps" can only make matter worse. Also I find this coupled with the phrase "on a drive to the basket" to be problematic. More than a few people think the traveling rule is different when a shot is involved. "He gets two steps on a layup. Everybody knows that."

[so cal lurker]

Originally Posted by just another ref

That, of course, is the problem. And if you can't tell for sure, you have nothing. But to flatly state "he gets two steps" can only make matter worse. Also I find this coupled with the phrase "on a drive to the basket" to be problematic. More than a few people think the traveling rule is different when a shot is involved. "He gets two steps on a layup. Everybody knows that."

At the gym a few years ago, I had a similar argument with several other guys who were 100% convinced a post move was a travel (I believe it was a step and scoop shot, but not sure). I tried to analogize to a layup as it was essentialy the exact same foot sequence that makes a layup legal -- while agreeing it was essentially the same, they collectively "knew," however, that a layup was different and what I did was travelling . . . in coaching MS, I don' even bother worrying about travelling calls at all -- If ind them so hopelessly inconsistent that they aren't worth worrying about; I can just teach kids to do it right and hope for the best . . .

[Nevadaref]

Video request: 17:30 of the 2nd half North Carolina at Clemson (ESPN)

This guy's tip for calling traveling is well illustrated.

[Rich]

I'd rather miss 100 borderline travels than call 1 that's not there.

Maybe that's why so many are "missed" in some people's minds.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Rich

I'd rather miss 100 borderline travels than call 1 that's not there.

Maybe that's why so many are "missed" in some people's minds.

The problem is that a lot of them that are missed are not even borderline.