On the topic of the Moussa block/charge call. If Moussa’s heel was hovering over the line but not actually touching the line, wouldn’t that by definition mean that he was not in the restricted area? I know that is essentially grasping at straws but the same logic applies to being in vs out of bounds and shooting a 3 vs a long 2.
Is this the play?
4 Likes
Thanks for finding that! Hunter pulled that off really well and I can’t believe the official called it a travel. It is technically a travel by the letter of the rule, but those are “layup steps” that never get called (at least when guards with quicker feet and shorter steps make the move). I think I’ve talked before about how the NCAA really needs to change its travel rule to match the FIBA rule so that the standard Euro (and plenty of layups/dunks for that matter) is no longer technically a travel. I don’t know why the NCAA is so stubborn about keeping the travel rule as is. Bilas talks about this every year. I disagree with a lot of what Jay says about officials, but he is spot on re: the NCAA travel rule being stupid.
1 Like
It’s the opposite. From the book…
A secondary defender is considered to be in the restricted area when any part
of either foot is in or above this area.
2 Likes
The one thing I liked about empty gyms (which obviously sucked) was how much you could hear the coaches on the broadcast. Super interesting to me
2 Likes
I watch 90% of sports on mute. Last year was the only time I didn’t. Loved hearing everything on the court.
3 Likes
Now you see why some of us remember this random play! It was completely ridiculous for a 7’1” 260 freshman to pull off
1 Like
The NCAA put in a point of emphasis this year to essentially call fewer travels, fwiw.
1 Like
Here is the official wording…
Traveling – With regard to three specific basketball moves (the spin, the Eurostep, and the step back), the determination as to whether a moving player has
executed a legal play or has committed a violation is based on the player’s feet
when the player picks up (controls) the ball. If the player picks up the ball with
one foot on the floor, that foot is the pivot foot and the player may jump off that
foot and land simultaneously on both feet. In this case, neither foot can be the
pivot.
Per Rule 9-5.4.a and A.R. 216 and 218, on plays where the location of the foot
at the time of ending the dribble is uncertain, the benefit of the doubt should
rest with the dribbler having made a legal play by ending the dribble with two
feet off the floor. This would result in most spin moves, Euro-steps, and step
backs being legal as long as no other violation was committed during the play.
In situations where the official is certain that a foot was clearly on the floor
when the dribbler picked up (controlled) his dribble, the traveling provisions of
Rule 9-5.4 should be enforced.
That should result in less travels being called, mainly because most players’ feet are so quick that there is generally doubt about whether one foot was on the floor when they picked up their dribble. Still seems crazy to me that they wouldn’t just change their rule to conform with the rest of the world.
1 Like
Kind of a baffling and unnecessarily complicated half-measure. Except wait. It’s the NCAA. That’s their official slogan.