More NBA traveling...

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by mcuban

Im back

The question really is a 2 parter

1. How can you change mechanics to catch travelling

or

2. How can you simplify the rules so that some of the nuanced travels are no longer travels. Do we make it 3 steps ? And why not ?

Across the board we are going to be looking for ways to make the life of an official easier. How can we simplify the rules and remove some of the more difficult calls.

As has been said here before, players will adjust.

I think we make the game too hard for the officials

Anyone have ideas on how we can simplify the rules ?

Simple, officials need to get full support for calling those travels that everyone says are not "obvious" or are just "technically traveling", to include telling coaches they can't complain about travel calls that are made.

Originally Posted by mcuban

Im back

The question really is a 2 parter

1. How can you change mechanics to catch travelling

or

2. How can you simplify the rules so that some of the nuanced travels are no longer travels. Do we make it 3 steps ? And why not ?

Across the board we are going to be looking for ways to make the life of an official easier. How can we simplify the rules and remove some of the more difficult calls.

As has been said here before, players will adjust.

I think we make the game too hard for the officials

Anyone have ideas on how we can simplify the rules ?

Officiating is as much rules knowledge and judgement as it is knowing where to look when. Even with a 1 on 1 matchup you have to referee feet, body, and arms at the same time. Sometimes you have to split your attention or pay more attention to one area which allows stuff to fall through the cracks. Imo traveling gets the short straw when it comes to reffing the contact versus reffing the feet, and rightly so.

I think the way traveling is officiated is a problem. I only see maybe one obvious travel per game (out of 180ish possessions in an NBA game) that goes uncalled. I could care less about the less obvious, "technical" ones, but it's not like the refs are missing those on purpose -- they have more important stuff to look at.

Edit: I went back and looked at the Jimmy Butler play in the OP. Lead could have seen it, but he was probably watching the defenders. Slot couldn't see the feet through the backs of three players, and Trail (who probably would have picked this up had he stayed at FTLE) bailed early following the rotation. I'd chock this one up to bad positioning by the Trail. How do you fix this? Either get refs who are better at positioning or add more eyes on the floor.

[Nevadaref]

There are a few things contributing to the NBA's traveling problem:
1. The League is about making money and believes that offense sells tickets and attracts TV viewership, which equates to advertising $ and TV contract revenue. The NBA does not want the high-flying dunks and spin-moves negated by traveling calls from the officials because the offensive player used illegal footwork in making the crowd-pleasing play. This is the mentality which it has bred into its fans and is now a victim of its own creation. It will be very difficult to get people to accept strict policing of footwork as occurred 40 years ago.

2. The athletes are amazing physical specimens. They are HUGE men who are agile, strong, and quick. Therefore, the speed of play is quite fast and it can be difficult for the officials to discern the footwork even when in the proper position, but it seems that more frequently the issue is that the sightlines become blocked by other players. At the NCAA tournament this year an NBA scout told me that the biggest difference between the pro and college game was how much the NBA players shrink the floor. They are so big, long, and fast that the amount of time and space which offensive players have to operate is greatly lessened. The only practical solution is to enlarge the playing court. This would spread the players out more and provide better views for the officials.

3. The language of the NBA traveling rule is vague and unclear. There is something about a two-count rhythm being permitted after catching the ball. I have no idea what that means and I've officiated HS and college. Is that steps, seconds, heartbeats, times a shoe may contact the floor (same foot or both feet)? I truly believe that the fans, players, and officials are unsure about the rule because of this language. Therefore officials have to allow questionable footwork in catching the ball at the end of a dribble or when receiving a pass while in motion. They just aren't certain what is illegal and should be penalized. This text needs to be rewritten. I would prefer seeing the language used by FIBA or the NCAA. In any case the rules for traveling need to be consistent throughout HS, college, and the professional ranks. This would permit players and officials to develop familiarity with proper footwork as they advance up the levels of competition.
Note that I purposely criticized a blatant traveling violation from a playoff game which did NOT involve a player just receiving the ball, but one in which he already had it, in an attempt to avoid the argument that the NBA traveling rule is different (from HS, college, and FIBA).

4. The players are valuable commodities to the teams and the league. They make large salaries and protecting them from injury is a high priority. That mandates that the officials concentrate on contact first and illegal footwork thereafter. Also coaches, players, and TV announcers complain about illegal contact frequently, but harp on traveling much less. Thus the focus of the officials is going to be on the area for which these people express more concern. Curiously, if the footwork were required to be more precise the game would effectively be slowed down as players in possession of the ball couldn't get a running start or gain extra speed from an additional step and the collisions would be lessened and not as severe, resulting in better player safety.

The NBA could consider going to four officials instead of three as hockey did several years ago. This would permit the officials to already be places and not have to be moving along with the players in an attempt to achieve a better angle from which to call plays. Calls are mostly missed during rotations and while officials are moving. The extra person would allow more "divide and conquer" techniques to be used by officials both in areas of court coverage as well as observing the different body parts of the players. It's not possible to closely look for fouls on the head and arms of 7-foot men jumping high into the air and simultaneously observe their feet. The issue is the same whether the action is a contested dunk attempt at the rim or a 3-pt shot. One officials can't watch both high and low, so two officials must be observing this action and when two officials can't physically get in position to see these plays there is a low chance of them being called fully correctly. The single official who can see it must prioritize what to look for, and that default is contact first, footwork last.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by AremRed

Edit: I went back and looked at the Jimmy Butler play in the OP. Lead could have seen it, but he was probably watching the defenders. Slot couldn't see the feet through the backs of three players, and Trail (who probably would have picked this up had he stayed at FTLE) bailed early following the rotation. I'd chock this one up to bad positioning by the Trail. How do you fix this? Either get refs who are better at positioning or add more eyes on the floor.

We also don't want all three officials watching the action where the ball is. Who would be observing the off-ball battles for potential rebounding position or any screening action?
The Slot shouldn't be looking to help with a travel under the basket. He need to focus his attention off-ball. The Trail would be the Lead's only source of help in such a situation and he could easily get blocked out.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by AremRed

... Either get refs who are better at positioning or add more eyes on the floor.

No one works and studies harder for proper positioning than NBA refs. I just do not think travels are their number 1 look.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

No one works and studies harder for proper positioning than NBA refs. I just do not think travels are their number 1 look.

The problem is that the offensive players become unguardable when permitted to travel. The only possible results are defensive fouls or made baskets.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

The problem is that the offensive players become unguardable when permitted to travel. The only possible results are defensive fouls or made baskets.

I think that's what the NBA wants.

If NBA officials were told to look for and call more travels, they would.

[mcuban]

They have that support.

[mcuban]

Actually. There are a couple split foot travels missed a game

I guess the question is whether those give a player an advantage

Originally Posted by mcuban

They have that support.

Originally Posted by mcuban

Actually. There are a couple split foot travels missed a game

I guess the question is whether those give a player an advantage

The refs have fine support from the league, that's not the problem.

I guess we need to consider whether the missed calls are a function of the refs seeing them and not calling them or the refs not seeing them at all. Individually they might look poor but as a whole the refs call traveling pretty consistently. That's my eye test, but your data may show otherwise.

[JetMetFan]

Another thought...don't or haven't we all at some point set aside the traveling rule at some point? Think about it: you're working a game with young kids or even a JV game where one or both teams is lousy. Kids are shuffling all over the place. Do you blow your whistle every time? I'm going to guess the answer is 'no' simply because we don't want to a 32-minute game to take three hours to play. However, you do try to get every foul because you don't want anyone hurt, you don't want a fight or a combination of the two.

I'm not saying NBA officials set aside the travel rule. We do need to realize:

1. The NBA's travel rule is different than the NCAA and NF rules
2. The NBA is about entertainment -- when we media types use file video from the NBA the courtesy is "NBA Entertainment." That's not an accident.
3. They, like many of us, have probably been told to call travels when they take place but if a call is to be missed better it be a travel as opposed to a foul. Missed travels lead to arguments. Missed fouls lead to fights.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by mcuban

Actually. There are a couple split foot travels missed a game

I guess the question is whether those give a player an advantage

The question is would you be happy with the results if you tweaked the filters a bit. In other words, if the refs adjust so they're watching the feet more closely, they're going to get more travels called. The problem is, they'll likely now be calling a few travels that aren't actually travels.

You're not going to get absolute perfection, so the question is which way would you rather they err?

[Pantherdreams]

Originally Posted by mcuban

Im back

The question really is a 2 parter

1. How can you change mechanics to catch travelling

or

2. How can you simplify the rules so that some of the nuanced travels are no longer travels. Do we make it 3 steps ? And why not ?

Across the board we are going to be looking for ways to make the life of an official easier. How can we simplify the rules and remove some of the more difficult calls.

As has been said here before, players will adjust.

I think we make the game too hard for the officials

Anyone have ideas on how we can simplify the rules ?

If you want things to be simpler for officials or simplify the rules there are easy ways to do that.

1) You write your rules with clear and easily identifiable markers for being in our outside the rules.

ie. The NCAA moved to and then away from "upward motion" vs leaving the floor on block/charge situations because "upward motion" was too difficult to determine or judge at the speeds of plays. So examine what humans can and can't see to write your rules to match ability. Some have suggested increasing court size would increase sight lines. Simplifying rules language to automatics and look fors does the same thing. THe automatic contact rules now mean officials have more time/attention to spend on footwork because after the first touch they don't have to judge the 2nd.

In terms of travelling maybe you say the ball has to be on the way to the floor or have hit the floor before the back foot comes out to make that easier to judge. Or eliminate words like simultaneous from jump stop rules so officials. Even saying once a player gets both feet down either can be their pivot foot means less look fors. I'm not saying any of these are good ideas just makes things simpler.

2) Make the measure of good officiating more to do with consistency of correct calls vs avoiding ball calls. The mentality of call it only if you are sure encourages letting go or missing of calls by officials in the same of fairness and good judgement. Where as if you called a call a specific way in a specific situations and 98% of the time you are validated, 2% you got wrong. Then you would have a call that was being made 100% of the time the same way rarely inaccurately and teams/players would adjust. KNowing the call is coming and is being called consistently makes the game just as "fair" but without the confusion over what is and isn't being called. Not what is currently taught but again simpler you just have to live with mis-calls vs MIssed Calls.

[Mark Padgett]

I think I may have posted this story previously, but it was a while ago and it seems like it's on topic.

Years ago I was working a MS "competitive" tourney and one of the players was the son of NBA player Kenny Carr, who was with the Trailblazers at the time. Kenny was sitting in the bleachers watching his son play. Every time the point guard on the other team would bring the ball up court, Kenny would chant, "TRAVEL, TRAVEL, IT'S A TRAVEL, HE'S TRAVELING" over and over. Finally, I turned to him and said, "Kenny, you play in the NBA. How do you know what a travel is?" He looked at me, laughed and said, "You know - you got a point."

[mcuban]

[QUOTE=Pantherdreams;962634]If you want things to be simpler for officials or simplify the rules there are easy ways to do that.

i agree 100pct. We have to simplify the rule book so that we have more automatic calls

Ive given them a long list. Will be interesting to see what gets traction. Things like
1. 2ndary defender cant step in and get a charge. You have to be actively guarding to get a charge. Just step in to try to beat to a spot and its automatic block

2. Grab/Clench in the post and its automatic foul, no matter what. Guys know that its tough to see, and when its seen, the official has to decide if it impacts the game. Grabs and clenches lead to pushes and shoves to extricate.

3. allow 3 steps for a layup. It doesnt really impact the game, it just looks bad and determining which is the first step can be tough. So make it 3 and deal with the heat we will get for it

4. Better define what a legal screen is. Open to suggestions here

5. Better define what is or isnt incidental contact on drives to the basket. Offensive players have figured out that the officials look at the bodies of the defenders. When there is contact , its very rare it becomes an offensive foul, and its likely its a defensive foul, so we see guys trying to create contact for the sake of conact

6. Get rid of verticality. Block the shot or get out of the way

Feel free to rip me to shreds