More NBA traveling...
 

Not surprising at all that the NBA continues to ignore blatant traveling violations at critical moments (plays) in games.
One of our video guys can post the clip of the basket by Chicago's Butler with 33.6 seconds remaining in game 3 versus Cleveland.

I'm curious if a professional league that actually enforced the traveling rule instead of allowing the players to just run to basket would have enough appeal to an audience to be successful. Right now, anything goes in terms of footwork as long as points are being scored.

He moved his pivot foot. What I don't get is why do so many focus on the NBA not calling travels? This same move will go uncalled in many Division 1 games. The officials have gone away from focusing on footwork and focus on contact. This is true at the NBA and NCAA levels, at least what I see on TV. I live in Canada so I won't comment on other levels in the US. Here in Canada, there has been a trickle down effect. Travels are not called the way they were. Good or bad I'm not sure. But why do we criticize the NBA more? Is it because they're supposed to be setting the standard?

I couldn't have written this comment any better. It's a great question.

IMO, as the game has become more physical, keeping an eye on defenders, particularly their upper bodies where most contact occurs, has become imperative. So it's hard to simultaneously watch the footwork on the separate offensive player. And of course if you're not sure, you can't call it. "Referee the defense!" they say. Good advice, but missing some travels is an obvious pitfall.

Until the game becomes less physical and/or less spread out like it used to be, I don't see travelling calls going up. C'est la vie. To be fair, it's not a huge point of contention for most of the evaluators and clinicians I've come across, so I think they're aware that this is a very hard nut to crack as well.

so in short the game has become more Offensive friendly.

notice uncalled travels are pretty common in this playoff, especially players like Kyrie Irving, that 1 extra step allows them to catch the defenders offguard, which is a huge advantage. but then again things happen so fast i believe most of the time the refs just ask himself:"hey, did he just travelled?".

They didn't miss it, they were matching up the no-call when LeBron traveled 10 seconds earlier.

NBA travelling is problematic to discuss for 3 reasons:

1) Notable rule differences. PIvot feet (and movement of) are not ruled and regulated the same as NFHS and FIBA. So while there are a lot of uncalled travels some of those are uncalled because the NBA rules set says its not and/creates more too close to tell situations.

2) Much like the NCAA experience we are starting to see NBA only wants to get the ones that are clearly obvious, in contested matchups and that gain an immediate advantage they wouldn't have gotten without one.

3) NBA officials like to work too. Unless they meet and talk about it and decide in all games regular season and playoffs to call more of these they are better off not calling to be consistent.


In terms of traveling in general I think that if the NCAA and other sports leagues can get past the idea of nobody wants to see you shoot 30 free throws/ 30 travelling calls. I think the travel call actually cleans up a lot of the stuff in the game people see as wrong with it. Defenders don't need to be as physical if they know players can't be as explosive or run away. Offense needs to have better footwork and better footwork I'm assuming would translate to time on footwork translating to a dribble, shot etc leading to better skilled players. Maybe thats naieve.

Those are often the ones missed.


Just like any calls, the players will adjust. It will never get to 30 travels (or 30 FTs) if it just gets called consistently. It only gets to 30 in some games if you have some officials not calling it and others calling it. The teams and player will, in a little time, adjust their play to what gets called, if it is called consistently. If not, the players will not know, from game to game, what is or is not legal.

And, to that point, it will NEVER be consistently called if the "expectation" of what should be called is not what the rules define. Either call it by what the rules specify OR change the rules to match what is really wanted.

+1

You can see alot of Kyrie Irving's contested layups are actually travel, but refs are focusing on defensive contacts rather than offensive footworks, unless the refs split the task like dude you watch the offense i watch the defense, it's hard for 1 ref to pay so much attention on something so quick like footwork & lose focus on contacts.

This is the only thing that bothers me about some people that constantly attack the NBA about how they call or don't call traveling violations. The rules are not the same as college and lower.

And don't forget that the NBA, like all professional leagues, are businesses. They are there to make money. They are not there to uphold the integrity of the game. Heck, you can probably say that about the college game too. High School? Probably not. But as long as it's still entertaining (aka "making money") then don't expect any big changes.

If it makes you feel any better the NBA did determine the play was an incorrect no-call.

Last Two-Minute Report | NBA Official

It does make me think more of the behind-the-scenes of NBA officiating that both this play and the one involving James about 15 seconds earlier were classified as INCs. Now how do we get to the point where the review process has a substantial impact upon what the guys call on the court?

Btw, posting the video (and a worse one) of the play doesn't provide the information. You wanted to post this link instead: http://ak-static.cms.nba.com/wp-cont...-15-GAME-3.pdf

Nevada, in case you haven't heard NBA refs are not robots. I'd wager there will continue to be missed travels (and all other types of calls) in the NBA game for the foreseeable future despite the review process. It isn't like they are missing these travels intentionally.

Actually I posted what I felt was relevant, which is the play and the video is the same that's on the league's web site. I figured explaining the NBA ruled it an INC was enough.


And yeah, they're human. They miss calls. It happens.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

I think that's what the NBA wants.

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

They have that support.

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.

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.

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?

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.

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."

[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 :)

Don't like #1 or #6. That penalizes good defense. Everyone on the court should be entitled to their space on the floor up to the ceiling.

What would be great is if you would come to an officiating camp. Joey Crawford and Duke Callahan run a 2-day camp at Villanova June 19-20. It's strictly a teaching environment with all the evaluators NBA officials (and all proceeds go to charity). You should give Joey a call.

BTW, I'm still mad about that White Castle comment earlier this year. :mad:

#1: This penalizes team defense. Not a fan.

#2: I'd be ok with this.

#3 if you allow three by rule, then they'll take four. The NBA rule already allows an extra step on this from other rule sets. Why go further?

#4 I'm not sure this needs defined more than enforced. But I'm also not convinced these aren't already getting called correctly.

#5 Again, just a matter of enforcement. The NBA officials are excellent. Have them no-call a lot of the offense-initiated contact and it'll stop because guys will be missing shots because they put themselves off balance.

#6 I just think this is a bad idea. Good defenders know how to pick and choose when to block a shot. Good shooters know how to avoid it. This rule isn't broken, IMO, so it doesn't need fixed.

Here's the NBA travel rule as written in this year's rule book. I really don't see anything vague or unclear. There are terms we don't use but it's a different game from ours. As has been said, the rule is different from NF and NCAA though a lot of things are the same.

As for being the same from HS up to the pro level, why? They're better than HS and college players and they're also entertainers. If you think no one goes to a HS or college game to see officials call traveling that's really the case in an NBA game. Again, better to miss some travels than miss some fouls.