Todd Von Sossan

[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.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

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

Camron:

I agree.

Our cable system here in Toledo, has two local HD sports channels for local sports. Just after Thanksgiving I was watching a tape delay of a girls' VAR game (I know one of the officials but I didn't recognize the other two) and watched the officials in this game make three mistakes in the first 1-1/2 quarters that I would not expect veteran VAR officials to make.

1) A2 catches a pass from A1 while standing with both feet touching the court. A2 starts to dribble before moving her feet. A2 is on her fourth dribble when the C whistles her for Traveling, ! I re-played the sequence three times and still couldn't see traveling on my big HD screen.

2) B1 has been standing on her position on the court facing A1 for at least three seconds when A1 dribbles right through B1, who never moves, and the C calls B1 for Blocking. It was a Charge call that I would have expected my first year students to get correct.

3) A1 is shooting the second FT of a two shot set when B1 enters the lane too soon and both the L and T signal Delayed Dead Ball. A1 misses the FT and after the L and T conference, Team A is given the ball for a Throw-in under its own basket, !

I do not know how easy stuff is so often screwed up by veteran officials.

Time to take my pre-breakfast nap now, .

MTD, Sr.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

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

Is this different than any other potential call?

Peace

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Is this different than any other potential call?

Peace

Yes.

[Pantherdreams]

Problems with missed travel calls:

1) Fouls are a judgement call (displacement, tower principle, etc).Travels are not. I understand that there technically still is some determination required as to when feet are lifted, location of the ball (gather, etc). But in an age of technology and video these are missed calls not differences of opinion when being evaluated or judged.

2) Non calling travels impacts the game in a much more difficult way for players to adjust. Players who routinely do not travel on takeoffs and finishes do so because of training and footwork. PLayers who routinely travel on takeoffs and finishes do so because of poor training or training habits. PLayers with bad footwork are clearly working on something else. Which means the coaches players who are working on footwork are not spending that time on tactics or conditioning which you as an official have now put more of a premium on. Perhaps more importantly bad footwork is quicker and more difficult to defend and players with good footwork are not going naturally or easily start using bad footwork to balance the game out. They can much more easily adjust to how much contact to create or play through.

3) Problem with only calling the borderline ones is that we know there are various levels and skills in regards to officiating games. If weaker officials are only calling the ones they are certain then borderline is now totally subjective and coaches/players are not learning and expecting the rule to be officiated diligently. We can say that kids should adjust but footwork is ingrained more so then how much contact to create or play through.

4) Often not calling travels can put kids at a disadvantage in terms of their development. We see kids in our corner of the world play in middle and school and even high school leagues where the standard for travels is not very high then suddenly compete at national tournaments or other high level high stakes events with top level officiating that is targeting footwork and suddenly they can't play because habits have been engrained. THis is not an officiating problem but as a stake holder in the game and its development it is a concern.

5) Gender bias? I'm not saying this in intentional but more a product of the speed or athleticism of the game. I would say it is much more difficult to be "certain" on a lot of plays in guys games then it would be similar plays in a females game. This is just because of the explosiveness of the player taking off. We might be fine with this and it might even be a necessary evil, but again under video scrutiny we could be calling one action a travel vs women because we are sure, and letting guys do it because we aren't as sure . . .

FYI: Please be aware that there are differences in some of the language between FIBA and NFHS in regards to calling some elements of travelling which would make a number of plays we look at travels but would not be in NFHS standards. Specifically in lifting the pivot foot to begin a dribble.

[so cal lurker]

Originally Posted by Pantherdreams

FYI: Please be aware that there are differences in some of the language between FIBA and NFHS in regards to calling some elements of travelling which would make a number of plays we look at travels but would not be in NFHS standards. Specifically in lifting the pivot foot to begin a dribble.

Could you kindly elaborate on this? (I can't think of an example relating to the pivot on a travel that would be OK in NFHS but not other codes. I don't claim to be an expert, but I though the NBA was more generous on this call, as there is always a pivot foot in the NBA, while not necessarily so in NFHS/NCAA.)