bseybs32 When a player has a pivot foot established and, in a failed attempt to pass the ball, rolls onto the 'point' of the shoe, (the tip toes), shouldn't this be called a travel violation? I have seen this called as a violation and let go. Thank you for the help.
bob jenkins bseybs32 wroteWhen a player has a pivot foot established and, in a failed attempt to pass the ball, rolls onto the 'point' of the shoe, (the tip toes), shouldn't this be called a travel violation? Why should it? I don't see "the pivot foot moving in excess of prescribed limitations" (or whatever the rule book wording is).
tref Actually, the pivot may be lifted (how else can players attempt a jump shot or layup) its not a violation until it returns to the floor, before releasing the ball. In your sitch it never came off the floor.
bseybs32 I didn't descibe a player shooting. I described the player attempting a pass. So no violation as long as the pivot foot is maintained within it limits. Once the foot is drug, we have a violaion. Thanks again, just want to get it correct.
mbyron bseybs32 wroteI didn't descibe a player shooting. I described the player attempting a pass. So no violation as long as the pivot foot is maintained within it limits. Once the foot is drug, we have a violaion. Thanks again, just want to get it correct. When a player is passing, "the pivot foot may be lifted, but not returned to the floor, before the ball is released on a pass or try for goal." So shooting and passing have the same limit; dribbling is different. Dragging the pivot foot constitutes "moving it in excess of prescribed limits." Rule 4-44.
Rich Exactly. If the pivot foot drags before a pass/shot, it's a travel for moving it beyond the prescribed limits. If the pivot foot is lifted, it's not a travel unless it's returned to the floor before the pass/shot.
bseybs32 Rex Ryan wroteThe title of this thread is grossly misleading. :mad: How is it misleading?:confused:
Welpe bseybs32 wroteHow is it misleading?:confused: I'd wager he is a spammer, so I wouldn't pay him any mind.
Rich Welpe wroteI'd wager he is a spammer, so I wouldn't pay him any mind. I'd wager it's a regular making a Rex Ryan / foot fetish joke. Not me.
Welpe RichMSN wroteI'd wager it's a regular making a Rex Ryan / foot fetish joke. Not me. Wow, had to Google that one as I wasn't even aware of it.
bob jenkins Welpe wroteI'd wager he is a spammer, so I wouldn't pay him any mind. I think it one of our regulars who just used a different name to chyme in on this thread.
Adam bob jenkins wroteI think it one of our regulars who just used a different name to chyme in on this thread. Maybe it's Mark Cuban?
chymechowder haha, well played bob j. welpe, surprised you never heard that rex ryan story...but maybe it wasn't front page news outside of new york and boston? what's the mark cuban reference?
JRutledge chymechowder wrotehaha, well played bob j. welpe, surprised you never heard that rex ryan story...but maybe it wasn't front page news outside of new york and boston? what's the mark cuban reference? There was a poster about a year ago that said they were Mark Cuban and was complaining about officiating and came here to do it. The person actually said they were Mark Cuban and it had some people wondering if it was him or just someone pulling everyone's leg. Peace
rockchalk jhawk Rex Ryan wroteThe title of this thread is grossly misleading. :mad: Many will disagree here, but I want to take a moment to applaud the near perfect use of the novelty user ID. Well played, sir.
Welpe chymechowder wrotehaha, well played bob j. welpe, surprised you never heard that rex ryan story...but maybe it wasn't front page news outside of new york and boston? what's the mark cuban reference? Between basketball, the holidays and my wife being ~8 months pregnant, I've been pretty out of the loop. 😉
bbcof83 rockchalk jhawk wrotemany will disagree here, but i want to take a moment to applaud the near perfect use of the novelty user id. Well played, sir. +1