we've been through how this does nothing to build your theory of vagueness. Help us out by "codifying" what "comes to rest" could mean. There is no proof that Nunn said it was a travel due to the dribble ending in CJ's single left hand. He simply could disagree with me on when the right foot landed vs when two-hands gathered. It's a bang-bang play, and, hell, CJ has his back to us. If we disagree on timing, that has nothing to do with the rules being vague. There was no Hop stop (per Clause H under the Traveling rules), so I don't know why Nunn used the term "hop to left." Your turn. You explain how Nunn might have thought that was a Hop Step Travel per Clause H. OK. Can I say your theory is "Many Step-backs are travels because the ball came to rest in one hand of the dribbler." Now, if you try to explain that to someone else and they say "what do you mean by 'come to rest' in one hand," how would you further explain that? That's all I'm asking. I need help from you in understanding what you mean by coming to rest in one hand, beyond what's in the Dribbling Violation section. The Dribbling Violations lists several cases. It's not a circular argument. You're just saying it's not complete. Add to it. Here's what we know: The dribbling violation covers the case of resting the ball from underneath it, and it covers the case of pinning it against your body, and it covers the case of running with it like a football. You say it doesn't include all of them. Just tell us what cases it doesn't cover, in your own terms. Oh, we can definitely say it couldn't be a carry, because the Carry definition clearly says you have to have your hand under the ball. I think you mean "Double Dribble," right?
You disagree on whether it is a travel. Either you think Nunn is not basing his position on his interpretation of the rulebook, or you disagree on the interpretation of the rule book. Which is it? 1. I need only describe one which does not contradict any rules currently in the rule book. It could be: A ball is at rest under the control of a player if he takes two or more steps with the ball in physical contact with his hand(s). Or: A ball is at rest under the control of a player if the ball is in physical contact with his hand(s) for longer than 0.5 seconds. 2. "Comes to rest" is not a good phrase. Use terms that are unambiguous in meaning. 3. He said its a travel; you said its not. See above. 4. Read the rule book. Conditions on when a player may not continue his dribble include the dribble ending. The relationship and distinction is clear. You inverted it.
No, we can disagree on timing of the play, which has nothing to do with rules interpretation. Pretty much every single case of Refs disagreeing on calls on the court are due to their judgement of what they saw vs rules interpretations.
That is true. Good point. And, yes, I meant double dribble violation on your other response. Good catch. I’ll respond to the rest later when I have time.
cool, in case you intend to add more to the list of come to rest cases, let me just add a few questions for clarification. Questions for clarification: I guess your .5 seconds or 2-Steps thing is an attempt to quantify "Time or Movement" durations to the rule. Seems you need to add more to it, though. When do you claim pivot foot? At the beginning of the .5 or 2-steps, or the end of those durations? The 2-step thing might open a big can of worms, potentially making other dribbling maneuvers illegal. see my list below. I can define more cases of ball coming to rest under player control that not even yours would cover, nor the Rule Book. What about those? I'm not following. I guess your .5 second thingie gives plenty of time for all the fancy dribbling maneuvers. But your 2-step thingie might very much cause new End of Dribbles conflicts with well established dribbles used merely to protect the ball. You know how Harden dribbles between his legs in a crazy 8, weave pattern...alternating legs he dribbles through. Curry, Wall and Irving, too, right? Wouldn't that sometimes be a 2-step shuffle, thus technically End of Dribble? What about fastbreaks when a defender tries to steal the ball and the dribbler does a quick spin while retaining physical contract with the ball during the spin. I can see 2-steps in that, too. And not just fastbreaks, don't awesome dribblers like Paul often do 2-steps when spinning around someone in the lane (moving the ball with them). Wouldn't these be end of dribble now? Hell, a simple Francis hop while dribbling could produce two steps.
Hmmm. I don't think he is referring to that clause. That is talking about consecutive steps with the same foot (i.e. hopping on one foot). I don't see that happening. I understood "hops on left" as that is the foot off of which he gathers the ball -- since in a usual "hop step" you gather the ball immediately after the hop. So the sequence is 4 steps, which I'm supposing he sees as: 1. Left foot "hop" 2. Gather followed by right foot plant 3. (step back) left foot 4. (step back) right foot You consider the gather as occurring when both hands touch the ball. I think he looks at that sequence and sees the gather occurring off of the left foot rather than the right foot. So that break's the 0-1-2 waltz rhythm he keeps referring to. The other ref who commented on this play from the Blazers board also felt that CJ had possession of the ball before the right foot plant, and based off that reasoned it was a travel. Is it because he misses where both hands land on the ball, or does he just interpret the gather as happening between the 1st and 2nd steps above? I suppose that's a little up in the air. I suspect it is the latter, since the video I sent him did show it in slow motion so he shouldn't have had any trouble with the timing of it. I mentioned one that it doesn't seem to cover already. That's grabbing the ball from the top. That either would need to be included in the dribbling violations list, or it needs to be covered somehow in the "end of dribble" conditions. I know my attempts probably didn't cover all cases. And I'd need to think more about it to give you a satisfactory answer on how to define it. But that is kind of the point -- the concept is not easily definable and hence it can mean slightly different things to different people. It's just sort of a feel and rhythm thing, when a player has corralled the ball under their control. Hand under the ball would of course qualify, but it's not exactly exclusively that since a player could also palm the ball from the top. And if one is able to take multiple steps while the ball is in one of their hands (regardless of hand position) that seems like one could interpret the ball as being gathered under their control. It would be nice if there's a way to define it more precisely, but absent that we have to live with something that is a bit open to interpretation. OK. I see how that would be difficult to integrate cleanly while keeping those moves legal. It could be done by saying that if the ball is in contact with one hand for 2+ steps before the other hand also touches the ball, then the "end of dribble" event occurs between the second to last and last of those 2+ steps. So you don't get an actual end of dribble unless it is immediately followed by both hands on the ball.
Just saw his latest tweets, which supports the view that he sees the gather occurring before the right foot plant, despite both hands not yet on the ball.
Yep, just saw that too. Came here to post. He had originally retweeted my photo that prompted his correction and clarification. I'm glad he is so cool to keep responding, and thx for the initial post to him to get this started. For me this is major inconsistency with my understanding from his video explanations on how Wade's "delayed gather" worked in his prime. And all the calls I've seen him make since. it also conflicts with some of the videos of Coach Nick. I basically got all my understanding from Nunn, combined with me/us having no precedence for travels being called via one-hand gathers (beyond underneath hands). If he's calling that a one-hand gather, I'm now siding with anyone who says it's too hard for us to actually tell when a ref can claim gather. since Nunn actually thought there was a hop initially, I did send him a direct question whether or not he's saying it's a one-hand gather. If so, I'm siding with you @durvasa on vagueness of Gather.
Lol, if only he knew that both of y'all were engaged in an extremely detailed discussion on Clutchfans.
I know you're joking, but these guys do like to engage. think they actually respect that, as he knows his words will help more than just that single responder. Just hard for us to preface via a short tweet how we will post his replies to many, later. I think Larry Coon knows that too, when I left comments on his webpage wrt DMo's contract fiasco. In fact, he does. I lead by telling him that. Also, back in 1999, or so, when I first met Coon, I'd show him Feigen/Blinebury, etc., printing something wrong, and say how can we clarify better accuracy of the rules. That led to him inviting me to be an editor for his second CBA FAQ....woohoo...one of my biggest claims to fame. lulz Anyhoot, here's his final tweet of "Comes to Rest."
For those who like to learn more about any rulings, Joe Borgia (Sr. Vice President of Replay & Referee Operations) is very active on NBA TV and nba.com providing instructional videos and interviews. Note, last year he released vids after nearly every big controversy in the playoffs. Keep an eye out for him....he is the active Official Voice of referee instructions and L2M and Replays. Here's his March 28th, 2018 explanation of Player Footwork, with freeze-frames of 3-4 gathers (including side-by-side of Harden/Curry step-backs). He summaries the gather as "controls the ball enough to pass, shoot or hold it." Those three terms are indeed in the rules. http://official.nba.com/player-footwork/ His "hold it" is mostly 2-hands, but can be palming from above or (Per Nunn) coming to rest while underneath a hand, although we don't get a view of one like CJ's of ending dribble from above. Borgia did choose 3-4 gathers in this vid that were either 2-hands or player was cupping the ball from underneath. Wish he could add this vid to it, with a front view, for further instruction and clarity, especially since CJ did this at the time Borgia made that vid. One thing for sure (which also makes CJ different), all the plays Borgia chose (and others he chooses for other instructional vids at "Making the Call" channel that I viewed in last few days), the pivot is actually already down whether the player gathered with 1 or 2 hands. CJ wasn't. From the time he went from 1 to 2 hands (in just a split second), he also went from left foot down only to right food down only. Borgia 2009 article to follow
Of further iinterest, Borgia is the man who actually, "finally" he says, got the 2-steps wording in the rules back in 2009, after "decades" of always allowing it anyhow. Part 1: I'm getting a 10,000 character limit [Joe Borgia 2009 Article] NBA Traveling: "We Really Don't Reference the Rulebook" This is 2009. An Article about how Borgia finally formalized the 2-Step Rule in the books. The enormous flat-screen TV on the wall of Joe Borgia's office is showing a moment of the 2005 Christmas day game. The Miami Heat's Dwyane Wade catches the ball on the right wing, eyes up his defender, the Lakers' Kobe Bryant, and plows into the lane. We're on a high floor on Fifth Avenue, at the NBA's headquarters, where Borgia is the Vice President of Referee Operations. After controversy involving a travel call on LeBron James and his crab dribble, the ensuing commentary made clear that while basketball fans and journalists may be upset about how NBA referees do or don't call travels, very few of us really understand the NBA's actual traveling rule. The written rule is far more complicated than you -- or indeed most NBA players -- would expect. And some digging has revealed that the way it's actually called in games is far more complicated than that. Borgia oversees the referees and tells them how to enforce this and all NBA rules. We're watching TV together, so Borgia can tell me what is and is not an NBA travel. Wade makes a body fake for the baseline, freezing Bryant for an instant, then drives hard for the middle, where Bryant guides Wade into a helping teammate. One of the NBA's great genies, it appears, has been bottled. But no! Still moving at warp speed, Wade picks up his dribble while spinning hard on his right leg. The move neatly tucks Bryant away from the play, while opening Wade a seam to the hoop. Ball in hand, he storms the opening with first one big step, onto his left foot, and another, onto his right. Then, while a foul is called, he finally elevates and shoots. In real time, the whole thing takes less than a second, and it's hard to tell what happens. But Borgia has referee eyes, and sees after one quick viewing that this is a case of a player gathering the ball and then taking two steps and shooting. "I don't see a travel," says Borgia. "He gathers the ball, and then he gets a one-two." The same play appears in slow motion. At this speed, however, it's clear Wade's spin included a simultaneous hop. That's a moving pivot foot -- which should be called a travel every time. Seeing that, Borgia allows, this is certainly one of many travel calls that are missed in any NBA season, but this isn't one that he'll lose sleep over. "If you can see that in real time," he says, "God bless you." Two Steps? A couple of weeks later, I call Borgia again. I have this article half-written. I have spent quality time with the NBA's rulebook, video clips, and a number of interviews. I have learned a ton. But there's one key point -- the biggest point of all, as it happens -- on which things remain fuzzy. In that play, Wade clearly picks up the ball and then takes two steps. But the NBA rulebook, and a hundred million basketball fans around the globe, insist players ought to get only one step after picking up their dribble like that. Yet Borgia was ready to give him -- and every other player -- two steps in that situation. In the conversation that follows, Borgia unravels one of the NBA's great secrets. "We really don't reference the rulebook." Disgust. For many of basketball's fans, that's the main reaction to seeing today's NBA players cover great distances -- sometimes almost all the way from the 3-point line to the rim -- without dribbling the ball. "It's very blatant now," says Walt "Clyde" Frazier. One of the greatest point guards in NBA history, Frazier is also, as a Knick team broadcaster, a close observer of today's game. "They go twenty feet to the hoop without dribbling one time. This is what they are getting away with nowadays. Some of them are so obvious. You'll hear me on the broadcast saying 'That's a travel! Watch the feet!' Wilt [Chamberlain] would have averaged 100 points a game if they had let him do that." Frazier speaks for multitudes who are convinced that when it comes to traveling, referees nowadays ignore the rulebook almost entirely. Shockingly, Borgia -- the man in charge of telling referees what is and is not a travel -- admits that referees are instructed, by him and others, to ignore one part of the NBA's written traveling rule. "We really don't reference the rulebook," says Borgia. Where the rulebook says Wade, in our example, has to shoot or pass after taking just one step, Borgia says NBA referees work with the rule of thumb that such players are entitled to two steps. Without wanting to be identified, other NBA officials confirm that there is an age-old schism in basketball that is only now coming to light. The rulebook says one step, and vocal fans have long insisted it stay that way -- in keeping with every other level of the game. Yet for as long as anyone can remember, NBA referees have operated with the direction to allow players to take two steps after picking up a dribble, or catching the ball on the run.
Part II A New Rule to Replace a Confusing One Borgia is hoping to end the schism. He recently drafted a new rule legalizing the second step. "I wrote a version," he says, "and I put it out there." He is waiting to see if "the people upstairs" will embrace the change. Borgia claims the current rule is so confusing that it's impossible to tell if it allows one step or two. The suspicion is that the NBA ignores the rule to inspire exciting offensive players to create great moments. Borgia insists the rule is ignored simply because its intent is lost in a tangle of legalistic terminology. The key part of the traveling rule has not changed in more than a half century. It is dense and nuanced, for something that describes one of the most basic elements of basketball. (Blazer rookie Greg Oden's proposed re-write, after reading the rule: "If you don't take a dribble, and you're moving ... that's a travel.") But the rule is also clear on the key point: A running player who picks up his dribble, or catches a pass, with a foot on the floor, gets one more step before he must shoot or pass. The key part of the NBA's official rule is as follows: A player who receives the ball while he is progressing or upon completion of a dribble, may use a two-count rhythm in coming to a stop, passing or shooting the ball. The first count occurs: (1) As he receives the ball, if either foot is touching the floor at the time he receives it. (2) As the foot touches the floor, or as both feet touch the floor simultaneously after he receives the ball, if both feet are off the floor when he receives it. The second occurs: (1) After the count of one when either foot touches the floor, or both feet touch the floor simultaneously. The first count clearly occurs "as he receives the ball, if either foot is touching the floor." Picture Wade, at the free throw line. He has his foot on the floor as he gathers the ball. He then gets just one more count before having to get rid of the ball. He instead was granted two -- plus a missed moving pivot foot. Two steps, the current status quo, clearly ought to be outlawed, or the rule changed. Instead there is confusion. "The book," Borgia says, "possibly could be interpreted differently from what actually happens. You could read it so that it's almost like you're allowed one. If you interpret it that way, right. That's where we're having an issue." What's clear, however, is that NBA referees have long been instructed by the League that two steps are allowed. "Forever, as long as I can remember, a player has been allowed two steps," says Borgia, whose father was an NBA referee for the league's first two decades, and then a referee supervisor. "I've never heard anything other than that. ... Everyone in the world knows you're allowed two steps." A New Permissiveness? Borgia's new version of the rule would allow two steps, and he doesn't even think the NBA's rules committee will need to see it. "We're not really making a rule change," he says. "We're just trying to write the rule that makes sense." Borgia's position is supported by a cursory examination of video. Highlights show everyone from Bob Cousy to Magic Johnson taking two steps after gathering the ball off the dribble or catch. What's harder to look up, however, is vintage footage of players getting called for travels. There are several reasons why two steps today might look worse than two steps in the 1960s. For instance: Players have gotten bigger, stronger, and faster through the years, and appear to have grown more aggressive in using their allotted two steps to full maximum advantage. For many NBA players, two steps are all that's needed to get from just inside the 3-point line all the way to rim. Players are employing strategies to maximize the effect of two steps. Rather than simply taking an extra step on a layup, now it's common to see players like Manu Ginobili or LeBron James change direction once or twice -- eluding defenders -- without dribbling. The League is essentially telling players with this mentality that they need not dribble as they drive through the defense. Thanks to League Pass and DVRs every NBA play is now subject to intense scrutiny for violations of any kind. The worst of them make their way to YouTube. A feeling emerges that referees might be in decline. But are they? Or are they merely subject to new scrutiny? Frazier does not discount those effects, but is not buying that as the whole story. He insists that the NBA consciously allowed scorers more leeway as a reaction to the ugly, low-scoring, defense-oriented basketball that thrived in the early 1990s, especially under Pat Riley and assistant coach Dick Harter in New York. "When guys couldn't put up points, about when they changed the hand-check rule, they made things easier for scorers, because these players can't shoot like we did," says Frazier. "Those few years when the Knicks were good -- that wasn't pretty basketball." I ask if he thinks it was a deliberate strategy on the part of the league. "Yes," says Frazier. "Making it easier for scorers." Frazier sees it as an affront: "If I'm a defensive player, it's hard to stop NBA stars from scoring. I have pride in what I'm doing. Why give the offensive player even more of an advantage? You're going to allow him to do that? How am I supposed to stop him now?" This is a variation of the common complaint that referees will allow superstars today to get away with traveling on the way to the hoop. Dr. Jack Ramsay, a recent member of the NBA's rules committee and a leading voice for speeding up and opening up the game, says many aspects of the traveling rule are not called consistently -- a particular beef of his is seeing players come off a screen, catch a pass, and take steps before coming to a stop. But superstar treatment, he insists, is as old as the hills, and if anything has declined. "That has been going on forever," says Ramsay. "I think that, in fact, that's becoming less the case than it used to be. I remember Chet Walker. You remember him? I had him out at a kids' camp in the Poconos, years ago, as a guest. He was showing them how he did his move. And he'd fake with his right foot. Then he'd pick up his left foot, crossover, and then dribble. I said 'Chet, that's a walk.' He said 'that's my move!' He was allowed to do it his entire career. And he moved both feet before he started dribbling!" It Starts Young Borgia says he can prove that players taking two steps on the way to the hoop is not some scourge of the NBA -- but is instead simply the global norm in basketball, which some people don't want to accept. "Take a video camera and go to any high school game you want," he beseeches critics. "Film it, and then go home and watch it in slow motion. I won't bet the ranch -- we're not allowed to bet anymore -- I would say that there is a high probability that they're going to take two normal steps after they gather the ball." Borgia says he has done this same exercise watching classic NBA basketball players like Pete Maravich, and he's wholly satisfied that there's nothing new about allowing two steps. "The normal, basic layup, eighty percent of the time the player is going to gather the ball with a foot on the floor, and then we give them a one, two. "I teach little kids basketball. We say OK stand here. Take one step, layup. When you're dealing with six, seven, eight-year-olds, you stand at the basket and say take one step. Then you say OK, you made it five times, take another step back and one, two, one two. Then you go to the dribble. It's as basic as I can ever remember."
@heypartner Thanks for the article. It kind of confirms what I thought, that the 2 steps has been there forever on any level of basketball. It's just not written clearly and it has been exploited more pronouncedly in today's NBA. And my "purist" complaint has been not the number of steps but the direction of the steps. I still believe that the rule was set up for a running situation and the steps were assumed to be in the direction of the running motion. The Euro step and the step back/side step are exploiting the unwritten spirit of the rule, and it has been accepted as a norm. Anyhow, it has been clarified to me how it is called. I guess durvasa's point of vagueness in defining the gather is really not the vagueness of the rule but the difficulty of judging in real time when the dribble stops.
You mean it PREVIOUSLY (prior to 2009) wasn't written clearly....wrt 2-steps after ending dribble. Re-read it if you thought Borgia was saying 2-steps still isn't written in the rules. That was a 2009 article where he is being interviewed after, and because, they finally put the words "2-steps" in the rules. fwiw: FIBA just recently agreed that their wording wasn't clear, so adopted Borgia's 2009 wording Verbatim.
Hmmm. I think he is indeed still saying the wording of "comes to rest" is too vague....citing preference for quantifiable measures like .5 seconds of continuous contact with ball or 2-steps with continuous contact. I'm probably more in the realm of judgement and intent being the issue vs vagueness. The judgement being: when 1-hand gathered the ball vs when the dribbler can still Dribble. I don't think Nunn and Borgia have an issue with "comes to rest" wording when it's combined with the other wording of Holding, Passing, Shooting and getting underneath the ball, as they'd probably say they have plenty of wording to make an L2M ruling on CJ with what they have...just like they'll say Foul Wording isn't vague but has elements of judgment and intent. My take on the Rule Book: As someone who appreciates the difficulties of legal and technical writing (and an admirer of Coon's work towards CBA clarity), I'd probably vote against changing the wording. For me to say it's vague, that would require me to improve the writing, without worse consequences from making proposed changes. Bottemline: I'll say one thing for sure: I hate debates of judgement calls enough that you won't see me in these "Was it a Travel" again threads unless 1 or 2 hands ending the dribble is inconsequential,,,being irrelevant due to the pivot foot being down regardless....which is true for all cases in the Borgia video above, but wasn't the case with CJ.
btw: Borgia released a really good explanation video of the new Continuation rules. Anyone want to see it and discuss it ...it all makes sense to me, now. I.D.I.O.T.
Yes, that's what I meant. If I understood Borgia correctly, he felt that 2-steps had always been the rule but it had not been written clearly and become controversial.
And apparently FIBA was operating the same way as well...2-steps was always the rule but the book was so convoluted they tossed all their wording out, and adopted Borgia's wording verbatim. That was news to me.
