Scrum in lane, control gained with two knees on the ground...

[Rooster]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Never seen "improving his position" in the rule book.

That's why I used the term "principle." Probably should have used the term "idea."

I think I get what you're saying. I should use rulebook verbiage to explain my rationale.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Never seen "improving his position" in the rule book.

translation: "attempt to get up or stand"

"Traveling is moving a foot or feet in any direction in excess of prescribed limits while holding the ball."

In the case of traveling rule, the legal actions are enumerated and all other foot movement is illegal. I don't see any place that says a player can move from two knees to one knee and a foot. Therefore, by rule, it is traveling when that foot touched the floor, but not with just lifting the knee.

[crosscountry55]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Sounds like something worth pre-gaming every game.

I mean, I couldn't believe it! There I was, sipping my scotch, when all of a sudden.....oh, hey BadNewsRef! What was that you said? Oh yeah, I agree, that should absolutely be pre-gamed every assignment. Right after the trail-center on-ball coverage conversation. Unique travels that occur most frequently in middle school girls games are a "gotta have" talking point in every pre-game. Glad to see we're on the same page here.

See ya' tomorrow or sometime this weekend. I'll be one of the tall skinny caucasian refs if you want to say hello.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by crosscountry55

I mean, I couldn't believe it! There I was, sipping my scotch, when all of a sudden.....oh, hey BadNewsRef! What was that you said? Oh yeah, I agree, that should absolutely be pre-gamed every assignment. Right after the trail-center on-ball coverage conversation. Unique travels that occur most frequently in middle school girls games are a "gotta have" talking point in every pre-game. Glad to see we're on the same page here.

See ya' tomorrow or sometime this weekend. I'll be one of the tall skinny caucasian refs if you want to say hello.

I'll be there Friday.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by crosscountry55

I mean, I couldn't believe it! There I was, sipping my scotch, when all of a sudden.....oh, hey BadNewsRef! What was that you said? Oh yeah, I agree, that should absolutely be pre-gamed every assignment. Right after the trail-center on-ball coverage conversation. Unique travels that occur most frequently in middle school girls games are a "gotta have" talking point in every pre-game. Glad to see we're on the same page here.

See ya' tomorrow or sometime this weekend. I'll be one of the tall skinny caucasian refs if you want to say hello.

The point is that if you know your rules, you'll be able to call whatever does happen when it happens and not have to make something up, even if you're good at making stuff up.

[HokiePaul]

Originally Posted by Rooster

That's why I used the term "principle." Probably should have used the term "idea."

I think I get what you're saying. I should use rulebook verbiage to explain my rationale.

I'd have gone with "A player or a team should not be permitted an advantage which is not intended by a rule" instead of improving his position, but the "idea" is the same in my opinion. Without this concept, is there anything that would stop the player from "walking" on his/her knees without attempting to stand up?

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by HokiePaul

... is there anything that would stop the player from "walking" on his/her knees without attempting to stand up?

To start a dribble, the ball must be released before the pivot knee is lifted.

[Rob1968]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

To start a dribble, the ball must be released before the pivot knee is lifted.

And then there was the travelling call I witnessed, on a player holding the ball while sitting on his buttocks . . .(as explained to me at halftime by the calling official) - "He changed from one butt cheek to the other" . . .

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Rob1968

"He changed from one butt cheek to the other" . . .

"Jesus says 'to turn the other cheek' and while I can agree with that, I've only got two, so after that, all bets are off." (Unknown)

There are two Internet rules, Godwin's Law and the inevitability of an Officiating.com forum discussion on traveling bringing up the "pivot cheek".

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by Rooster

NFHS
Sitch: Rebound tapped around, which results in a scrum in the lane. No pushing, legal contact, etc. A1 gains control of the ball with both knees on the ground and lifts one knee off the ground to make a pass. The other knee is still in contact with the ground. I'm not sure if 4.44.5D applies because the starting position is ONE knee on the ground... My intuition tells me that lifting the knee in any similar situation is a violation. What do you say?

If A1 still has control of the ball at the instant the knee is no longer in contact with the floor a traveling violation has occurred.

MTD, Sr.

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by Rob1968

In contrast, if a player is kneeling on both knees, and raises one knee from contact with the floor, he/she is still kneeling, howbeit on one foot, and as I see it, has come short of an "attempt to stand."

There's your problem.

It doesn't matter how you see it. The rule states traveling occurs when the player attempts to get up. When he lifts one knee, he has attempted to get up, whether he stands or not.

Don't believe me? Kneel on both knees. Now, get up without lifting a knee.

[OKREF]

Lifting the knee doesn't necessarily mean an attempt to get up. Sometimes we have to adjudicate intent. If the movement of the knee was simply a byproduct of attempting a pass, then it is nothing. If you judge lifting the knee was an attempt to get up, then it is a traveling violation. At least that is how I would look at it.

[Rob1968]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

There's your problem.

It doesn't matter how you see it. The rule states traveling occurs when the player attempts to get up. When he lifts one knee, he has attempted to get up, whether he stands or not.

Don't believe me? Kneel on both knees. Now, get up without lifting a knee.

(I greatly appreciate the Smile as it indicates that this is just an exercise in off-season friendly rhetoric.)

Noting that all discussion of the Case Book plays is in regards to Rule 4-44-5:

The Case Book play 4.44.5 SIT D: starts with the player securing possession of the ball while kneeling on one knee. The language of the Case Book play accepts the action of lifting that one knee to be an attempt to stand, that is, on both feet.

This is consistent with the generally accepted definition of kneeling, as having either or both knees touching the floor; and with the definition of standing, as having both feet touching the floor, or one foot touching the floor and the other suspended in the air or touching an object above the floor. (See Rule 4-44-2 a 1.)

The Case Book play does not address actions prior to the player coming to the position of kneeling on one knee. It does not address how the player arrived at the position of kneeling on one knee. In fact, the Case Book play cannot address any such actions, because the Ruling involves the player having possession of the ball.

If the player starts in a position of kneeling on both knees, and then secures possession of the ball, upon lifting one knee, the player is still defined as kneeling, and has only arrived at the starting position noted in the Case Book play. And as stated in the Case Book play, an "attempt to stand" has not yet started, and a violation is still not applied to an action prior to the attempt to stand.

Case Book plays 4.44.5 SIT A and 4.44.5 SIT C address actions prior to the actions noted in Case Book play 4.44.5 D. Those actions include A) falling to the floor while holding the ball, and C) dropping to the floor with one "a" 'knee while dribbling.

In Case Book play 4.44.5 SIT B the phrase "Any attempt to get to the feet is traveling unless A1 is dribbling." Upon noting that the word "feet" is plural, and that a person kneeling on one knee is considered to be kneeling and not standing, one may logically consider movement from a position of kneeling on two knees to kneeling on one knee is not an "attempt to get to the feet" (plural).

Indeed, the writer(s) of Case Book play 4.44.5 SIT D chose to address neither the issue of a player securing possession of the ball while kneeling on both knees, nor the action of that player changing from both knees touching the floor, to one knee touching the floor. The issue addressed is narrow, and the lifting of the one knee of the player, while holding the ball, must be defined as an "attempt to stand," because only one knee is touching the floor.

As noted in a previoss post - not mine - NCAA does not consider the player going from a position of both knees touching the floor, to a position of one knee touching the floor to be a travelling violation. The NFHS wording of the Case Book plays leaves that issue unaddressed.

Some NFHS officials choose to apply the Case Book plays to that issue. I do not choose to do so.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Rob1968

If the player starts in a position of kneeling on both knees, and then secures possession of the ball, upon lifting one knee, the player is still defined as kneeling, and has only arrived at the starting position noted in the Case Book play. And as stated in the Case Book play, an "attempt to stand" has not yet started, and a violation is still not applied to an action prior to the attempt to stand.

Not really. Don't confuse specific cases with general principles.

Originally Posted by Rob1968

In Case Book play 4.44.5 SIT B the phrase "Any attempt to get to the feet is traveling unless A1 is dribbling." Upon noting that the word "feet" is plural, and that a person kneeling on one knee is considered to be kneeling and not standing, one may logically consider movement from a position of kneeling on two knees to kneeling on one knee is not an "attempt to get to the feet" (plural).

Indeed, the writer(s) of Case Book play 4.44.5 SIT D chose to address neither the issue of a player securing possession of the ball while kneeling on both knees, nor the action of that player changing from both knees touching the floor, to one knee touching the floor. The issue addressed is narrow, and the lifting of the one knee of the player, while holding the ball, must be defined as an "attempt to stand," because only one knee is touching the floor.

These are examples of what is traveling. It is not the threshold of what it takes to travel.

The rule itself is quite clear....movement of the feet beyond what is listed as legal is traveling. Thus, lifting one knee and putting that food on the floor is traveling since there is nothing that says it is legal.

Originally Posted by Rob1968

As noted in a previoss post - not mine - NCAA does not consider the player going from a position of both knees touching the floor, to a position of one knee touching the floor to be a travelling violation. The NFHS wording of the Case Book plays leaves that issue unaddressed.

Some NFHS officials choose to apply the Case Book plays to that issue. I do not choose to do so.

Lifting the knee alone, to me, is not yet traveling. However, going from two knees to one knee and one foot is foot movement that is beyond what the rules declare to be allowed and is thus traveling.