In all the nba highlight clips they jump off two feet. According to the actual rule in the nba it's NOT a travel, but I've seen it called many times. The unspoken "jump off two feet" rule seems to apply in the nba
2 clips they jumped off of one but you have to slow it down. Here are many examples where it is not called. I think the sample size of called travels are very little. th-cam.com/video/vCbAtpVNxjw/w-d-xo.html&ab_channel=RefereeUniversity
@@refereeuniversity I think the issue is recently this changed were it's not called, but it used to, that's why we all thought it was, and everybody calls it in pickup. Watch older clips from players like Kobe and Jordan and you can tell they made a point not to do that, there is a reason so many people think it's a travel. The game is different now. The clips you showed are all new clips so I don't see what they prove.
For real, you have any idea how many more dunks and points someone like Jordan would've had in their career if they did this type of step through where the pivot foot is lifted ?
@@Dru_Won This move doesn't change Jordan's ability to score. Practically all of Jordan's poster dunks are off of 2 feet= Balance and probably more power is why he opted for it.
I don’t play basketball but was genuinely curious to find out the truth.. What he did was completely legal in the NBA and is not considered a travel. As long as he passes or shoots when lifting the pivot foot it is a 100% legal.
@@shaynelhta it's hard for people to understand because if you read the rule, it says you can lift the pivot to pass or shoot. It says nothing about taking an additional step thru before shooting. I don't think anything like that was allowed in the past. If that's allowed now, it should say so explicitly in the rule.
Thank you for clarifying (btw. the euro is a perfect example for NOT having to jump of both feet). BTW: The Fiba-wording of 'jump' is unfortunately less clear than the NBA/NCAA pendant 'lift'. I suspect different reasons for those widespread misconceptions (also reg. other rules): 1.) THEY NEVER LOOK INTO THE RULE BOOK! ... it's amazing how even professionals can do the "yes-no-yes-no-dance" for half an hour without referring to the specific wording of the rules (which would cost 2 minutes). 2.) Communicating in 'hip talk' instead of the terms of the rules; instead of 'pivot foot', 'lifting', jumping', 'act of shooting', ... a lot of discussions are based on 'hop step', 'euro', 'up and under', 'jab', .... while those maybe helpful when training a specific technique, they are notsuitable fpr discussing rules. 3.) bad refs / calls or playing without refs: ... All this leads to uninformed rumors spreading wild.
Yes, I even double check with a FIBA representative if the step through is allowed due to the jump wording. They confirmed it is allowed and when they mean jump, they interpret it as a physical jump/leap forward (like a bound) opposed to stepping forward to finish. 1. Yes, they tend to learn from on court experiences or what they have seen be called as opposed to actually reading the rule book. That is where I see the most issue is for misinformation.
I see your point but in the Up and Under compilation literally every player in each clip jump off of 2 feet and not 1. I haven’t see this move being done until 2020 in the NBA tbh and they’ve been travel calls sometimes
@@refereeuniversity actually i watched another video and it helped me to understand the difference. so now I understand the rule and your point is legit and correct. I was shocked quite a lot actually of getting to know the actual rule. yet most of the people do not know it and will continue not knowing it
@@seriousdeep1753 I don't mean any disrespect to anyone. but. jumping off the pivot foot means just that. you have to jump using your pivot foot. not take a whole step then jump off that foot that wasn't even your pivot. like the Melo example, off course it's a travel. he didn't jump off his pivot foot. he took a whole nother step and jumped off that foot that he took the step with. he didn't jump off his pivot foot.
Great video! I was just arguing about this with some guys I play ball with. I like how multiple people commented that you were misinterpreting the rule so you posted another video that conclusively shows they're actually the ones who are wrong. A week ago I would have said this was a travel, now I have no doubt that it's a legal move.
travel 100%. the rule as shown in this video you can jump off your pivot foot. meaning you can jump off of that foot specifically. it doesn't say you can take a step, then jump off of that foot that you took a step with. it's simple enough.
@@EddieDuranLLC I sympathize with your position because it took me a while to accept the truth but it's definitely not a travel. The wording in the NCAA rule book is the most clear. It doesn't say "you can jump off your pivot foot" but instead says "the pivot foot may be lifted" as long as it doesn't come back down before you pass or shoot. You get 2 steps whenever you pass or shoot and the pivot foot "may be lifted" during that process as long as it doesn't come back down. This channel has another great video showing multiple in-game examples of legal up and under moves using this technique. About a minute in there's a clip of a former referee explaining why it's a legal move. Here's a link to that video... th-cam.com/video/vCbAtpVNxjw/w-d-xo.html Then here's another video on a different channel that also has a great explanation and features an NCAA ref. Pay special attention around the 6 minute mark where he talks about a regular layup. That's what really made it click for me. Let me know what you think... th-cam.com/video/UUgRw8JeSwk/w-d-xo.html
@@_JellyDonut_ it does say pivot may be lifted. but that only means you can lift it if you jump off both feet to take a jumpsuit or a jump pass. the rule has to say that because if you jump to take a shot or a pass and come back down, it's a travel. everyone says the pivot foot may be lifted, yes that's true it says that. but the pivot can be lifted to jump or pass if you jump off both feet. nowhere I'm amy rule book does it say you can take a step. it just says you may lift the pivot. meaning you can jump off the tripple threat position to take a effing jumpshot or a pass. no effing extra step allowed. nowhere.
@@_JellyDonut_ "the pivot foot may be lifted" ok, where does it say you can lift it after taking a step? it's very fuking simple. yes it can be lifted if you jump off 2 feet. and don't return to the ground with the ball. I'm all honesty people just don't know ball and don't have reading comprehension. I'm spelling it out for you.
@@EddieDuranLLC It's funny that you would be rude about it when you're so obviously wrong. Did I say anything vulgar or disrespectful to you? Anyway if you watched those videos and you still don't understand then I'm not sure what else to say. You said "people don't know ball" but the videos I linked to both feature professional refs. Are you saying they don't know basketball? How about the guy who runs this channel, which is called Referee University. Are you suggesting you know more about the rules than him? It doesn't say anywhere in the rule book you have to jump off both feet when lifting your pivot foot. If it did then you wouldn't be able to take two steps for a layup, which you obviously can. It just says "the pivot foot may be lifted" which clearly indicates that you can pick up your pivot foot, regardless of what your other foot is doing, as long as you don't put it back down before you pass or shoot. Let's make this simple. If you're only allowed to lift your pivot foot when jumping off two feet then how it is legal to take two steps on a layup?
Finally!!! Thank you! I get so tired of uninformed players calling travel when I pick up my pivot foot and jump off the opposite foot. I tell them you don’t travel by picking it up but by putting it down. And then they start making up rules about why I got a jump off both feet simultaneously which is literally impossible.
@@refereeuniversity imo all 3 nba clips show players jumping off of both feet no matter how much you slow it down. I came to this video Bc I did not know the rules on this matter and learned from you that it is legal in NBA, WNBA, and college. However, I have to disagree with the legality in fiba. the fiba rule book sample you provided states that you have to “jump” off of your pivot foot and neither foot can make contact with the ground before the ball is released. So if a player establishes a pivot foot and then takes a step, they have just made contact with that foot and left there pivot which is a travel. Also, taking a step towards the basket with the non-pivot is not considered a “jump” so it seems like it should clearly be illegal in fiba. Can you explain how it would be considered legal according to the fiba rulebook?
@@alexcepeda3439 We can disagree on the first point and I can show you still frames for proof if you would like. I agree with you, FIBA's writing of the rule gives that interpretation, that it can be deemed not allowed. Even known referees do not call it and most people seem to believe it is allowed, I contacted FIBA rep's about it. I asked for clarification or at least considering the rule change. Here is the answer I was given: Key to a legal step through - is that the player steps off the non-pivot foot - he does not jump off the pivot foot. We don’t need to split hairs is there is a split second that both feet are off the ground - before jumping off the non-pivot foot - but it is a step - not a jump or hop - thus the rule language is valid: "To pass or shoot for a field goal, the player may jump off a pivot foot, but neither foot may be returned to the floor before the ball is released from the hand(s)." Saying that because the rule says jump and not step, that a step through is valid. Hope that helps.
@@refereeuniversity nobody lifted their pivot foot in the NBA videos you showed , they all basically went off 2 feet. Yea an up and under /step through has always been a thing , but as these videos shows - players have always been taught to jump off two feet and not lift the pivot. Like Kobe wasn't doing the same thing as Candace Parker here, at all
In high school I was thought that picking up the pivot is an automatic travel. It was like an unspoken rule. I wish I would have known the truth so that I could have implemented this move into my game
This video is 100% correct. The “lift your pivot foot to shoot or pass” concept is the basis for all the basic shots. Layups. Jump shots. Up and under. Fade away. EVERYTHING. So many people don’t understand the basic rules of footwork it is embarrassing. Every move you know is derived from this basic principle. A pivot is not exclusively a rotation of your foot/body. I can step back and then take a giant step forward and then back again as many times as I want as long as my pivot remains in the same spot. These are not steps. If refs are calling this move a travel they are not good refs.
In HS they will call this a Walk. In the NBA they won’t, it’s that simple. It looks like a travel to me but who know? All these “new” rules is why NBA players are impossible to stop
We taught this move in HS for years. The rule is the same across all federations with regard to releasing the pivot foot, ie the up and under is clean.
I’ve always played like this, but one thing bothers me after actually seeing the text that’s supposed to make the move legal. It never explicitly states that you can keep your non pivot foot on the floor, just that you can jump off a “pivot foot” (which is clearly defined in the preceding text/section as one foot which is achorex to the ground. It seems that the text of the rule is more clarifying that you can jump to shoot once you’ve run out of dribbles instead of somehow making stepthroughs/ dirk fades/ sombor shuffles legal). And considering that FIBA has a rule that you can’t switch pivots/take a step without releasing the ball for a dribble (the exact footwork used in a step through but you dribble instead of shoot), and that the FIBA text is less step-through friendly, it seems like it should 100% be illegal there. I know it’s not reffed that way, but the text is really unsettling
Yes, I agree that the FIBA written rule makes it seem like those moves are illegal. I asked someone in FIBA why it’s written like that, and they said it’s because they determine a step to be different than a jump. Thats why it’s written that jumping off the pivot is the only thing making it illegal, and they don’t see those moves to be jumping off a pivot, only stepping. I think they should mimic the NBA rule on pivots to provide more clarity and consistency. Especially since they allow these moves
@referee University I have a question. If you keep reading the Fiba rules, this is also in section 25.2.1. It sounds like this move is totally legal if done after catching the ball, but not after finishing a dribble. - A player who catches the ball while he is progressing, or upon completion of a dribble, may take two steps in coming to a stop, passing or shooting the ball: - If the player who comes to a stop on his first step has both feet on the floor or they touch the floor simultaneously, he may pivot using either foot has his pivot foot. If he then jumps with both feet, no foot may return to the floor before the ball is released from the hand(s).
If you watch Embiid's footwork he does the step through up and under after finishing his own dribble. I think the rule indicates what's now called "step 0". For example let's say you dribblling to the right with a step 0; step to the left with your left foor and catch/finish dribbling in the same time, this is step 1; and you can still take one more step to either direction using your right foot, and that's step 2; basically the two steps are determined by "completion of a dribble", players with great handles can utilize that step 0 and timing of completion of dribble to do different kind of layups and footworks. Joel Embiid and Giannis if I recalled right does this a lot.
Yes, FIBA's wording should be altered to reflect what they allow. I brought the same concern due to it discussing off of the pivot foot. They said the intent is to hop off the foot, not step
There’s nothing there to suggest that coming to a stop changes anything. That last section is merely qualifying how to identify the pivot foot in that circumstance. There’s no change to what can be done with the pivot.
This is called a travel by most people who played ball in the 80s, 90s, and 00s. It is always an argument mostly with the younger generation that has played ball in the 10s and 20s. This was ALWAYS a travel back in the day. Younger generation wouldn't know because they weren't around. That is why everyone that did an up and under jumped with both feet. It was understood that once that pivot foot left the ground you had to be in the air shooting or passing. If you actually stepped through, you had in essence switched your pivot foot and the ref was immediately blowing the whistle. I'm not sure if the rule has changed but if not, the interpretation of the rule definitely has changed and the younger players are playing by the new interpretation while the older players and refs are mostly struggling with changing how they have experienced this basketball rule most of their lives.
interpretation from players and referees have changed, we could debate on why: education, misunderstanding, apply rule sets that referees called on them that were incorrect... regardless, you need to be able to step off a pivot foot to be able to do a layup, it has been legal since the start by rule. Only major change added would be the 0 step due to the athleticism of players.
Great video. Sadly much needed even in 2020 it seems... Personally I think there are two relevant clauses in the rulebook, the one in the video (25.2.1 first bullet third bar) and a later one for a progressing player (25.1.2 second bullet fourth bar). Notice the difference "the player may jump off a pivot foot, but neither foot may be..." vs "If he then jumps with both feet, but neither foot may be..." which clears up any doubts re step-2 being legal on the step-through. All in all my reading is that it doesn't say it's illegal, it conforms to the principles of pivots and layups we find elsewhere in the rules so it is legal as we know and apply day in day out.
If 0:35 is legal (in compliance with 25.2.1. Pivot foot rule), then I got the ball on the spot without moving or dribbling (in compliance with 25.2.1.PIVOT RULE at this time), and then wait for 3 seconds or 5 seconds. , then take another step, then jump up on the pivot foot and shoot(just like 0:35). Don’t you think it’s ridiculous? FOR 25.2.1. People need to jump both feet.
Based on the examples from the video: Candice lifted pivot and took 1 extra step KG says its a travel All the nba & wnba footages shown in the video show player jump off 2 feet when pivot lifted. The rule on all 3 levels clearly says: "Established pivot foot can be lifted but CANNOT LAND before a shot or a pass. It does not say before ONE MORE STEP." The exception is only made for pass and shot, not step.. otherwise, you could lift pivot, hop infinite times on the other feet, before taking that shot. Taking off with two feet is already the damn loop hole that pushed this rule.. lets not introduce step through as legal..
Slow down the video and they take off one. Almost impossible to take off of two with a forward momentum. Additionally, most layups require lifting the pivot foot. Lifted pivot foot is a step through, it’s not one more step. It’s the same allocated step you get with a jab. Step throughs are legal
True. But crazy to me because I started playing basketball in 1991 I just found out you can lift up your pivot foot. I tried to explain to the young people that they had to take off with both feet simultaneously like we used to do and like Kobe does.
i've watched and played basketball quite a long time, i didn't know a step through was legal either until someone recently told me. i am kind of blown away to get this wrong. less embarrassing to know at least some of the nba was wrong too. i probably got my thinking from what was said in games 20 years ago but who knows. i wonder how many players didn't take advantage of this move thinking it wasn't legal
NBA: 5:54 - the move is NOT a travel because the wording is “raises” his pivot foot. FIBA - 6:10 - the move IS a travel because the wording is “jump” off a pivot foot. Melo’s move is not a jump off of the pivot foot, it’s a jump off of the non pivot foot. NCAA - 6:30 - the move is NOT a travel because the wording is “may be lifted” referring to the pivot foot. I learned something new today, thanks.
FIBA should clean up it's written rules to avoid confusion. By the written word, I agree, it sounds like that would be a travel. However, I brought this concern to a FIBA rules rep. International rules talk about jumping off your pivot foot, not stepping. You can step through because you are stepping off your pivot foot and not jumping. Legal action. Direct interpretation from a FIBA rules official.
You’re still misinterpreting the FIBA rule. “May jump” off the pivot foot after coming to a stop does not mean MUST jump off the pivot. “May” means something is allowed, but it does not ever mean that it’s required. It does not matter which foot is jumped off as long as the pivot isn’t returned to the ground before the ball is released by a shot or pass.
@@refereeuniversitythe problem is that people read “may jump” and take that as meaning the action must be a jump. The word “may” never means that though. It’s literally just giving an example of an allowable action. When the wording right after that says “shall not” return the pivot to the ground, that’s the only requirement being given.
I know I'm late, but I'm a little confused. According to the rule book you can lift your pivot foot as long as you don't put it back down. So can you go thru with your opposite foot (non pivot) and just stay on one leg as long as you don't place the pivot back down? If so that's an additional step and can be taken advantage of
@@refereeuniversity as the NBA/NCAA rule is written, it seems like you could keep hopping on one foot (the non pivot foot) and as long as you shoot or pass before returning your pivot foot to the floor, you're ok? I'm sure that's not the intent, but I can't see how it's disallowed based on the wording.
@@younesbarakat1395 My bad, I missed this part of rules: "h. Upon ending his dribble or gaining control of the ball, a player may not touch the floor consecutively with the same foot (hop)."
If it is made of the drible or after catching the ball while moving it is just a slowed down two step move (leading up to layup, dunk, passing, fadeaway, floater, etc). It can't be done without a drible when you are standing with both feet on the floor and with the ball in your hands.
Now the next question is, can I lift up my pivot foot *before* I plant the opposite foot, and shoot after I jump off the opposite foot? By the NBA rule, I can, because I shot the ball "before my pivot foot returns to the floor". But this is incredibly silly: I am basically allowed to perform a two-step layup after a gather (pivot-opposite-shoot), with my opposite foot starting behind my body to give me momentum for the first jump from my pivot foot. In fact, by this wording, I can literally jump around the court 1-legged with my opposite foot however I want, and shoot the ball "before my pivot foot returns to the floor." Am I right?
If I read your question right then yes you can. It is similar to a fast break layup that you lift your pivot foot before jumping off your opposite foot. For question 2, it would violate the same foot consecutively rule. You cannot step with the same foot consecutively after the completion of a dribble which would render that a travel. You could stand like a flamingo though :)
bruh the NBA rules says you can lift your pivot foot and is only deemed as travel if your pivot foot is down before you shoot or pass. But the rules say you can't change your pivot foot. You have to jump off with both feet to hit a jumper.
@@Viinhachu right. This is my understanding. At the point you have “stepped through” onto that other foot, and lifted your pivot, you have now established a new pivot foot on that other foot. Which would deem it a travel
@@Viinhachu A pivot is the legal movement in which a player who is holding a live ball on the playing court steps once or more than once in any direction with the same foot, while the other foot, called the pivot foot, is kept at its point of contact with the floor. fiba rules on travelling. So by my understanding, a pivot foor is only established when u can pivot with that foot. In the case you described, you lift your pivot foot, but your second foot doesn't become a pivot foot since you cannot pivot with that foot (meaning that if i lift my pivot foot i cannot put it down again, so the other foot doesnt become a pivot foot).
@@stevenbolewicki2289 same thing i answered to the person above you. A pivot foot is not a foot that is on the ground, its the foot that stands still while you can take many steps with the other foot
There actually is three different moves going on in this video. The pivot double jump 《that the trainers approve as pivot not lifted before two footed jump), the step that occurs without both feet coming off the ground at the same time and the pivot is obviously off ground (the girl does this one)., and the most effective and advantageous version - the longer one footed hop step off the pivot in which both feet come off the ground and the non pivot foot jumps alone. The trainers are confused between the last two as the guy in black is doing both but is original move is the hop. To me, re first is all good, the second is iffy depending on rule book, and the third is always a travel as it's a jump.
You could, and should've. Grab the rulebook and educate them. Refs are human too and will be wrong too. Especially since rules change. If you have an experienced ref (10+ years of experience)... chances are he may remember the rule as it was 10 years ago. Maybe the rule has changed...
The question should be are you allowed to take an extra step by stepping off pivot. If you jump off both feet to pass or shoot its good but once pivot foot is established you may not step off to then take extra step to shoot or pass layup etc
The FIBA rule simply seems unclear to me. It says you can't land with any foot after jumping of your pivot foot. It ignores the possibility of jumping of the pivot foot while leaving the other one on the ground ,which seems to be the main factor in this whole controversy. That makes the rule unspecific and open to interpretation.
Yes the FIBA rules are not written to perfection and I have suggested that some alterations be made. The confusion mostly occurs within the USA on legality. I believe in places that play FIBA, they were taught the step through and the referees know that it is not a travel so most people tend to have the understanding that a step through is legal. I guess in the states it gets called and trainers teach players to hop off of both feet because they assume lifting your pivot foot is a travel. That is just a theory on why it has so much controversy in the states but now back to the rule at hand. I brought up a similar concern on the writing of the FIBA rule. I understood why step throughs are legal but felt the jump off the pivot foot is a little confusing so I brought it to someone higher up on the FIBA chain. Here it is: To pass or shoot for a field goal, the player may jump off a pivot foot, but neither foot may be returned to the floor before the ball is released from the hand(s). Picture the player, back to the basket. Holding ball. Pivots 180 degrees - right foot stays down, now he jab steps with the left foot - and then extends the left foot forward, lifts the right (rear & pivot) foot leaving the ground from the left (front - non-pivot) foot - releasing the ball before either foot returns to the floor. Legal no violation of the rule as he did not “jump off the pivot foot”. He could also make the same move as follows. Start facing the basket - jab with the left - then take an extended step jumping of the left (front - non-pivot) foot - releasing the ball before either foot returns to the floor. Legal no violation of the rule. He did not “jump off the pivot foot”. Now - both moves could be made and the ball released with the left (front - non-pivot) foot - still on the ground releasing the ball before either foot returns to the floor. Legal no violation of the rule. He did not “jump off the pivot foot”. Now - picture this - facing the basket - jab with the left - jump into the air - both feet off the ground - right rear pivot foot last on the ground - and then the jump (really now a ”hop”) takes him 10 feet left - he returns the left foot to the ground - still holding the ball - clear of any defender. Violation - he jumped off the pivot foot and returned to the floor creating a clear advantage. If he made this same move going forward we still have the same problem - if he jumps, hops, leaps 12 feet forward and returns to the floor with the ball he gains an advantage not intended by the rule. Key to a legal step through - is that the player steps off the non-pivot foot - he does not jump off the pivot foot.
I see the confusion in the wording but you cant jump off the pivot foot with the other foot on the ground. If the other foot is on the ground then you didn't jump, because you are still on the ground. That would mean that all you did was lift your pivot foot. The problem seems to be that they don't specify that lifting your pivot foot to pass and shot isn't a travel as the NBA and NCAA did
Logically though I don't think it would be a travel because it isn't a new step. For example if your left is you pivot foot and you are stepping with you right with your left foot down it isn't a travel. That would mean that your right foot was step two which is legal. If you pick up your left foot (pivot foot) and it doesn't come back down, then that's still only two steps. So why would it be a travel?
Yeah according to these rules while you are pivoting you can lift your pivot foot up and stand with your other foot only and it wouldn't be a travel. They should change the rule as" if your pivot foot is up and another part of your body is in contact with the ground, it is a travel." because that is how the rule is applied all over the world, and makes more sense from a basketball standpoint.
I don’t think it’s confusing at all. If you “jump”, that means both feet are airborne. Therefore, “jumping” off the pivot foot means you’re in the air and you have no choice but to land back onto the ground. They clearly state that landing with either foot makes it illegal. It isn’t a jump if you lift the pivot foot and the other foot is still on the ground. So basically, the up and under move is LEGAL as long as you shoot or pass, just as this video explains. Pretty simple, but I think you may be confused by the word “jump”.
I think lifting the pivot is fine to shoot, but taking another step after lifting is what everyone thinks is wrong, because it’s a step vs a shot attempt, that’s why people say you gotta lift both feet. The wording of the rule books don’t explicitly say you can’t put another foot down, so I guess it’s legal. I just wouldn’t do it to take a step towards the basket to shoot. Once you lift your pivot, you have to be in form, both feet lifted not taking a step to a layup. That’s what I learned and that’s what I personally think is fair, otherwise you’re taking a 3rd step which is a travel in my book. Kobe always pivot and faded off both feet at once. He’s the benchmark
Most if not all of the videos you showed were players jumping off 2 feet. My only confusion is although you’re saying the rule books state your pivot can be lifted to pass or shoot...it doesn’t say you can change your pivot in the process. Using Melo example he is basically switching his pivot to get a better shot. I’m sure under the same section on traveling on all levels it says “you can’t switch pivots” that’s why in most of the videos (aside from Tony and I think Kobe) the players jumped off 2 feet and didn’t switch pivots. I seen it called a travel and I’ve seen it not called.
Hey Josh! Thanks for watching the whole video and providing good feedback. Some other people have mentioned the same concern on the examples portion (in two of them you have to go super slow motion to see that they actually jump off one foot but real time it is hard to notice) so I made an additional video of the step through being done at various levels with clear cut jumping off the non pivot foot. You can find that here: th-cam.com/video/vCbAtpVNxjw/w-d-xo.html Also has two NBA officials commenting on it :) As for referees being inconsistent, that seems to be a USA problem. Not to target a country or rule set but step throughs are common practice around the world and have barely any discussions on it being a travel. Maybe it is in the education or training of referees, I do not know. I just know that USA tends to have that argument plenty of times. As for the switching pivot foots comment. It is important to understand that the pivot foot was not switched. If it was, Melo would have pivoted with the non-pivot foot (spinning on an axel of the balls of your foot or placing the original pivot foot back down to pivot). Melo is stepping off the pivot foot to go score. The rule states this clearly in the video that a player may lift their pivot foot (which Melo does) but it cannot return until a release for a pass or shot is made. He did exactly that. The pivot foot was lifted and never came back down until he released the ball on his shot. Thank you for the participation!
Josh, I agree. The rule book says if you pick up your foot the other foot becomes your pivot foot. Just because you don’t pivot on it doesn’t mean it’s not your pivot foot. So you’re basically switching pivot feet when you pick up your pivot foot and go to the other foot. Switching pivot feet is a travel. The video is right about if Melo goes off 2 feet he covers less ground. If you can just step through and switch pivot feet Melo can gain at least another 3 feet which is going to make him basically unguardable.
@@jmohl6831 Depends on the rule book. Some do not state that but for one that does (FIBA), I think your issue comes with how to read the rule book or how English language works. In one bullet point, which is the one you reference, talks about landing on two feet and whatever foot you lift, the other becomes the pivot foot. What this means: If you land on two, you have the option of having either foot as your pivot foot. It becomes selected when one foot is lifted. Then the following bullet point talks about dribbling after a pivot foot was determined. Then the third bullet point talks about scenarios with a pivot foot in shooting and passing actions. These bullet points all work together and they do not conflict each other. In order to "switch" pivot foots, then your original pivot foot would have to come back down before shooting or passing the ball which THEN would result in switching of the pivot foot. You are entitled to that step whether it is a layup or a step through. Also you can find other players doing this and NBA referees confirming this is legal here:th-cam.com/video/vCbAtpVNxjw/w-d-xo.html Thanks for stopping by!
Referee you may be correct about this but here lies the issue. Unless you’re able to put together a major marketing campaign to really get this out there referees and coaches are still going to interpret this rule how they see fit. I played a lot of basketball growing up on different levels and was taught by every coach that this very move was illegal once you picked up your back foot and went solely to the front one. I’ve been called for traveling by referees that believed I lifted my back foot instead of jumping off both simultaneously. I truly believe you may be right but I wouldn’t be comfortable using those moves in a game because of the ambiguity of the interpretation. That is easy to see from your videos. When you have multiple hall of fame nba players and high level trainers saying it’s a travel, even if it’s not, there’s definitely a chance the call is going to go against you when the game is on the line.
@@jmohl6831 You are right. From what I gather it is due to development and learning through personal experience. Official development differs in places and the interpreter or head referee should release a statement saying this move is legal. Heck, they can just show my video to referees and that was the goal of this channel: To bring awareness and clarity with the rules by having the actual rule shown and a visual to demonstrate. Second issues is personal experience. I am guilty of this as well. Majority of referees are going by personal experience on what was called when they coached, played or when the reffed with a partner who called it a violation. There are few referees that actually read the rule book front to back and implement the rule. I have done the same earlier in my reffing career and made calls on what was deemed illegal when I played pro. For the most part, this tends to be a great debate/issue in the United States compared to other places. I am sure there are other rules other places struggle with but it might have to do with the varying rules at all levels in the states and other places tend to go full FIBA. Sorry for the long reply but you are correct and I wanted to present what I think it may be!
You are completely and totally wrong. You point out all these rules which really have to do with the definitions of "up and down" meaning once you jump off your pivot foot, you have to get rid of the ball before landing. What you completely miss is the definition of a PIVOT FOOT Section VIII-Pivot a. A pivot takes place when a player, who is holding the ball, steps once or more than once in any direction with the same foot, with the other foot (pivot foot) in contact with the floor. Key phrase is "WITH THE SAME FOOT". You can't pivot off of one foot, and then lift that foot and pivot off the other foot. If you could, then why couldn't you do it a third and fourth time and walk all the way down the court. You get ONE pivot foot to......pivot off of. That's why it's called a PIVOT foot. Just think about it....could you pivot off your left foot with a pump fake, and then pivot off your right foot with another pump fake? No, because you get ONE pivot foot, not infinite. What Carmelo is doing is pivoting off his left, stepping onto his right and LIFTING HIS PIVOT foot. You can't do that, it's a travel!
You can't physically pivot when one foot is off the ground..... Lastly, can't do most layups or fadeaways if you were not allowed to step on the non-pivot foot
So according to fiba rules, if your pivot foot is 1, you can move your 2 with your 1 remaining on the floor. If you decide to raise your 1, neither foot can touch the fpground before the ball leaves your hand. So the WNBA move is illegal for fiba.
Great question. I had the same thought process so I brought that up to a credible FIBA source and they said "Key to a legal step through - is that the player steps off the non-pivot foot - he does not jump off the pivot foot.". So the step through is allowed if you step off it not jump off of it.
@@refereeuniversity This is the point that comes up more often then the "simple" step through where you lift your pivot but never have both feet in the air. I understand your explanation and would tend to agree. What I am confused about is whether this is somehow different when catching the ball stationary versus progressing (after dribble). The FIBA rules seem to indicate that to me as they talk about jumping with both feet in the progression section. I am imagining a basic jumpshot vs a side hop of the pivot foot. Any idea??
@@roc9290 Progression category allows for a zero step. So if you end the dribble with one foot on the ground, you can A) Jump off of it and land on two feet (allowing either pivot foot to be used) or you can B) take another step then jump off of it and land on two feet (where you cannot pivot). The progression just allows for the use of the zero/gather step. Hope that helps?
@@refereeuniversity I don't agree with this interpretation, but regardless every clip I have seen shows the offensive player jumping off of the non-pivot foot before releasing the ball. The rule cited does not mention jumping off of the non pivot foot. Once you are in the world of pivoting you are no longer in the world of 2 steps "upon completion of a dribble" ("upon" means immediately after to me rather than "at any time subsequent to completion of a dribble including even after establishing a pivot foot and pivoting, etc."
@@therationalpiper7428you and everyone else with this interpretation is completely misunderstanding the verbiage. You are never out of the realm of 2 steps to shoot or pass. Being allowed 2 steps to stop does not mean that coming to a stop changes anything with what you can do with your pivot. The wording after that is just qualifying how to identify which foot is the pivot. If a player comes to a stop or receives the ball while standing still and has an established pivot foot, he can take as many steps as he wants with the other foot. If the left foot is the pivot, 5 consecutive steps could be taken with the right foot. As long as that left (pivot) stays down, every additional step with the right is the 2nd step. There is no 3rd step unless the pivot is raised and returned to the floor.
lol i swear i argue this whole my life with people. I had a huge debate comments section under that Kevin Garnet clip and even some refs at the end had to admit i'm right . Good job keep educating ppl
Good analysis if Section XIII.d. is read in isolation. But it seems like there is difference. How many steps are taken and where is the jump started? KG and those NBA highlights jump off two, while Parker and some of the Melo layups show them jumping off the extra step.
Yes, but that is why it is listed in a bullet point. It is to be isolated because it is a different scenario/action. It is to be read in isolation for if and when that situation occurs. The key here is the difference/understanding of an extra step. KG and others jump off two, here is an additional list of those jumping off of one: th-cam.com/video/vCbAtpVNxjw/w-d-xo.html It is not an extra step because you are allowed it in a pivot situation. Think of layups, you are stepping off your pivot foot when you complete one :)
@@refereeuniversity ..."... It is to be read in isolation..."... No, you (and obviously many high-level referees) have chosen to read it in isolation, when instead it should be read in conjunction with the principles defined in prior definitions and rules..... you and others have made the rule and interpretation inconsistent because you have chosen to read it in isolation! There are two fundamental principles involved - 1) that you are allowed to "pivot" but not allowed to lift a pivot foot, and - 2) a concession is made for players already in motion to lift the pivot foot as they release the ball. You have taken a rule that was written specifically to elaborate on a concession allowed to fit the second principle (for players in motion), and applied it to override and contradict the first principle (for players who are stationary or come to a stop). I do not understand how you (and other high level referees) do not see and acknowledge how you have created and perpetuated this ambiguity and contradiction in the rules!
@@troylipsham4365 That is not true though. In the NBA section XIII of traveling, situation c & d have completely different allowances on the pivot foot. One allows lifting of the pivot if you shoot or pass after. One says if you dribble after lifting the pivot foot, it is a travel. They can be read in both isolation and in collaboration with each other. C actually states when both motion and stationary situations come together in collaboration of a rule. I can understand your confusion but if that is what the official interpretation is and how it's written, then how can we argue it? A lot of referees understand it and think it's clear enough. At the end of the day, if the person who writes and makes the rules say it is legal and the referees ref the game with that understanding then who really does not understand it?
@@refereeuniversity wrote: "...I can understand your confusion ... if that is what the official interpretation is and how it's written, then how can we argue... ...if the person who writes and makes the rules say it is legal...who really does not understand it? " I am not confused ... I understand that there are 'official' interpretations that condone this ... I understand that these 'official interpretations' disregard or contradict certain fundamental written rules... I understand how it is derived from reading certain rules in isolation... I understand that it creates a contradiction and ambiguity in the rules... I understand that you think the FIBA rules are inconsistent because they use the word "jump" instead of "raise" and this doesn't match your isolated interpretation of these rule... I understand how these rules and interpretations and style of play have evolved historically together. I understand how the rules alone don't dictate the game, and that some ambiguous rules have been abused into various styles of play and 'officials' have tried to interpret their written rules to match the play and to try and develop international consistency.... I understand that there is not any one person who writes and makes these rules and has the final say on interpretation (as you mistakenly suggest)... I understand that these interpretations are drawn from several conflicting sources and negotiated amongst several parties, and that when consensus cannot be reached the rule is left ambiguous or unresolved to allow separate interpretations. I understand a lot of high-level players, coaches and referees do think these rules are unclear and there is considerable confusion and inconsistency.... you just have to look at the source of your original post! And you just have to look at the reality of Zac's comment which you rubbished... he actually sums it up perfectly - it depends entirely on the referee as to whether you get called for a violation or not.... I understand this, but I'd like to think that the written rules will provide a clear, unambiguous guide as to how the referee will interpret it. But I now also understand that you are not interested in acknowledging or discussing the inconsistencies in the written rules and interpretation and using your apparent influence to remedy these inconsistencies.... I can see that you are merely interested in reinforcing the official (mis)interpretations despite the ambiguities and inconsistencies created... you make it clear that 'official' interpretations (whether or not consistent with the written rules) is all that matters, and that they override certain written rules. I commend you on your channel - you provide a lot of well organised clarifications and examples which are very useful for those who struggle to read or understand the rulebook and some good topics for discussion. I enjoyed our exchange of messages and would have liked to debate a few more topics, but there is little point if neither of us is in a position to influence 'officials' to tidy up the ambiguities.
@@troylipsham4365 there is actually no inconsistency. The travelling rules are actually applied different pre dribble and post dribble, and that's very clear. I will tell you what create an inconsistency though. Insisting that this move is a travel. Why? Because if this move is a travel, then we can never perform a 1-2 layup without travelling (unless we are doing a same foot-same hand layup). Because we are all jumping off our pivot foot while our other foot is on the ground.
According to fiba it says travel. Notice they say NEITHER FOOT MAY BE RETURNED TO THE FLOOR, meaning, you cant step to the non-pivot foot once the pivot foot is lifted.
In all the “non-call” nba examples (KG, tmac, Kobe), they’re going off two feet for a leaning jumper. Candace established a new pivot foot when the old pivot lifts. That’s a travel 75% of the time unless it’s a very small “extra” step for a layup
Slow down the video and the only guy who jumps off of two is KG. Due to them being not clear cut enough, I made a whole reel showing it occurring with no whistle and top NBA officials supporting my content. th-cam.com/video/vCbAtpVNxjw/w-d-xo.html&ab_channel=RefereeUniversity
why does the length of the step matter? you can pick up your pivot foot on a step thru but you have to get rid of the ball before you put it back down.
@@refereeuniversity dude no...the reason Kobe and others in this video did it the way they did is because they were taught it's a travel to lift that foot. The fact there may be a micro second where the foot is lifted that you might be able to see by slowing down the video is irrelevant lol
I agree with your interpretation for the NBA and NCAA - under these rules, the step-through is legal. But the FIBA rule states that "the player may jump off a pivot foot, but NEITHER foot may be returned to the court before the ball is released from the hand(s)." Since NEITHER foot can touch the floor once the pivot foot is released, the step-through would be considered a travel under FIBA rules.
Thanks for posting this. I think they interpret it like this now but as mentioned in previous comments, in the past, you lift that pivot foot, refs would call it because you are shifting your pivot/leverage to your other foot. But you're right, we have to accept it now just like the control/ gather step. I always watch when im at a new court. If they do it, i do it.
th-cam.com/video/C3w5U7vC0w4/w-d-xo.html In basketball lifting your pivot foot has ALWAYS been allowed so long as you shoot or pass before it comes down. The Up & Under is as nearly as old as the game itself. The link contains 500 examples of all eras of the nba. you're welcome
that "zac" guy says the right thing but draws the wrong conclusions... "you can pick up your pivot foot to pass or shot. you can't put it back down". well picking it up to shoot is exactly what he did in the first place so why in the world do you call it a travel???
It’s just crazy to me that these bums are tryna tell CARMELO ANTHONY about basketball. You think melo been dominating at every level and don’t know what a travel is and isn’t?
Well, he never dominated shitt, Kyrie thinks the earth is flat and taking an extra step after lifting your pivot foot is a travel. If you read the rules, it is literally just there.
If it was a travel that you wouldn't be able to do a layup. In a layup, the first foot is the pivot foot the second foot you jump off of and the first foot comes off the floor when performing a layup. Not a travel.
@@daviddemola6393 David here are some links below showing it is legal as well. I've looked into this a little more and in the NBA rule book it is clear that it is not a travel. official.nba.com/rule-no-10-violations-and-penalties/ "If a player, with the ball in his possession, raises his pivot foot off the floor, he must pass or shoot before his pivot foot returns to the floor. If he drops the ball while in the air, he may not be the first to touch the ball." The same is true for the NCAA language. www.ncaapublications.com/p-4586-2019-20-ncaa-mens-basketball-rules-and-interpretations.aspx "Art. 5. After coming to a stop and establishing the pivot foot: The pivot foot may be lifted, but not returned to the playing court, before the ball is released on a pass or try for goal; The pivot foot shall not be lifted before the ball is released to start a dribble" For high school NFHS rules it is also legal check out the following video. 30 minutes into the video. It was a 2018 point of emphasis for their refs. th-cam.com/video/3-c2cicAd8M/w-d-xo.html&feature=emb_logo
How are you interpreting FIBA as legal when the rule states: “Neither foot can return to the floor before the ball is released” When you lift your pivot foot your step through foot makes contact long before the shot gets up. The only literal interpretation for this sentence would be jumping off the pivot and both feet being in the air right?
That is a great question, the issue is wording could be changed to be more literal. My interpretation matches the FIBA rules Interpreter, that a step is not the same as a jump. The rule you are referencing talks about jumping off your pivot, not stepping off. Yes, poor wording but that is exactly how they interpret the rule on the matter. So, a step through, not a jump through, is legal.
Let's just end the debate here "The pivot foot is important because: A player must start dribbling the ball before lifting their pivot foot; A player may lift their pivot foot as long as they pass or shoot prior to the foot being put back on the ground" Rule 2.1.8 WABC. If the pivot foot is lifted, you can shift to the other foot and balance, lean, do whatever as long as you don't put your lifted pivot foot back down.
step tru is ok hop tru is travel/jump. melo hopped when both feet are on the air then landed on his non pivot before the layup in the 1st example but he did it very subtle so usually no call.
If you slow it down (Option on the cog wheel bottom right) you will see they are off of one. Since it was not clear enough, here are plenty more th-cam.com/video/vCbAtpVNxjw/w-d-xo.html&ab_channel=RefereeUniversity
If you slow it down (Option on the cog wheel bottom right) you will see they are off of one. Since it was not clear enough, here are plenty more th-cam.com/video/vCbAtpVNxjw/w-d-xo.html&ab_channel=RefereeUniversity
If it was a travel then every layup is a travel. It’s the same amount of steps. The first foot planted on the ground after gathering for a layup is considered your “pivot” and you can lift it without jumping off of both feet.
Absolutely untrue. They are both completelyyyyy different. A layup is taking two steps after gathering the ball. A step through could be gathering the ball, taking those two steps to a stop, establishing a pivot foot, pivoting around while using that pivot foot, and then lifting the pivot foot and taking anotherrrrr step. Completely different.
NBA and NCAA is clear that you can lift the pivot foot. FIBA says "May jump off the pivot foot", that clear and directly says that "you can not lift your pivot foot, and step on your not-pivot foot".....Not NBA-NCAA and FIBA say the same as you say
I am from Greece and for decades now we were told by coaches etv that you can not lift your pivot foot and step on the other. You could either jump with both feet at the same time or spin around your pivot foot. The wording on FIBA clearly describes this, if something has changed FIBA neeed to update the wording.
No one jumps with both feet when they're laying up. One foot always comes up before the other on a layup. It's only travel when you put it back down before releasing the ball.
Dude at the park kept telling me I was traveling tonight I'm like dude I've been doing this move since I was a kid when you start playing hoops crazy man people don't even know how to ball properly lol
Hi! I am with you when it comes to the NBA and NCAA rules. However, I think the FIBA rules are different by stating that "the player may jump off a pivot foot". When performing the movement shown by Candace Parker, you are not "jumping off the pivot foot" but you are jumping off the other foot (after taking another step), aren't you? So In my opinion according to the FIBA rules it could be considered a travel...
Great question, the big issue would be defining the difference between a jump and a step. In some of our recent videos, people were asking about some legal moves with the freedom of a step and I think FIBA should clean up their travel rule description.
Referee University I think the difference between a jump and a step is that it’s impossible to jump when your other foot is still touching the ground, otherwise it’s a step. So taking the FIBA statement literally, it would be a travel since the playing is not jumping off the pivot foot and instead stepping, which allows the other foot to jump.
@@timctam @Referee University has is exactly right re the unhelpful wording of the rule. That being said let me analyze it like a lawyer would: 1) start with the statement of the rule principle, namely "A player who catches the ball while he is progressing, or upon completion of a dribble, may take two steps in coming to a stop, passing or shooting the ball:" 2) Look at the exceptions and qualifications to this principle: there are 8 of these! The relevant one is "If the player who comes to a stop on his first step has both feet on the floor or they touch the floor simultaneously, he may pivot using either foot as his pivot foot. If he then jumps with both feet, no foot may return to the floor before the ball is released from the hand(s)." Notice it is describing the special situation of a pivot mid-layup. In this special situation, the only thing it says you cannot do is jump with both feet and return either foot to the ground. This is not the same as saying you must jump with two feet or it's a travel? Do you see the difference?
@@daviddemola6393 I love having these debates especially with people who love bball :). Just want to make sure we're talking about the same thing. 1. I'm not talking about jumping off two feet at the same time, no one is. 2. Agreed that the NBA/WNBA/NCAA call this a non-travel.3. We're talking about the FIBA rule which states at 6:37. "To pass or shoot for a field goal, the player may jump off a pivot foot, but neither foot may be returned to the floor before the ball is released from the hand(s)." The step through that Carmelo does is in violation of this rule and therefore is a travel. The FIBA rule should be changed. Why is it a travel given this wording? Because the player has established a pivot foot, but instead of JUMPING, he takes a STEP with the other foot. This is in violation of two things. 1. He didnt jump. 2. the other foot is on the floor before the ball is released. Lets take a look at Melo example. 2:31 - Melo establishes left foot as pivot foot. 2:32 - Melo steps through with right foot. The pivot is lifted. 2:32 - (end of that second) Melo jumps off right foot to lay up the ball. So, its established that Melo does not jump off pivot foot. Melo's does jump off non-pivot foot, after pivot is lifted. Its not a travel in NBA/WNBA/NCAA. It is a travel in FIBA. :) happy to nerd it out.
@@timctam Sure I love a good discussion too :) so let me articulate where I think you're going astray. (I accept all facts below "Melo example") : there are actually two sections in Art 25.2.1 first bullet 3rd bar and 25.2.1 second bullet 4th bar. The one you quote and in the video is not the one directly relevant to CA's move, or so I'm arguing, as he's progressing, not catching the ball with two feet on the floor (the opening clause for each bullet is crucial!). Let's say we agree that we're not talking about jumping off two feet then. I could say well fine, you've agreed the video is not one the cases the relevant section of rule says is a travel, so it must be legal. Further relevant rules notwithstanding end of story. But to engage with your point a little further, let's look at the first bullet, for the stationary player case. Although not written in conditional form " *If* A happens *then* violation V applies" this is how it should be interpreted due to the word "may". That is: "If a player jumps off a pivot foot then it is a violation to return either foot to the floor". So again I'm going to say, there is a difference between saying (among all the things a player can do) "a player *is allowed to* jump off pivot foot with some restrictions" and what you're saying implicitly: "a player *must* jump off the pivot foot or it's a travel". Long story short there's no rule saying you *have* to jump off the pivot foot, merely there are restrictions when you do. If you don't jump off pivot foot, you are only constrained by step count.
So for example on the paragraph at 7:24, they clearly just say that the pivot foot can’t return to the court, but wouldn’t it be a travel anyway since the other foot just took a step? Like you lifted the pivot foot, have no steps left (because after picking up your dribble you and pivoting you can’t just take steps anymore) and then your basically doing another step? This is how I always understood it, I’m genuinely curious as to why this would be wrong
It's not another step, you can lift your pivot foot (So step onto the foot your allowed: second step) to pass or shoot. You cannot do that when starting a dribble. FIBA rules that are written can be more clear instead of relying a lot on interpretations of the rule. They should change it to NBA rule outline
Everyone is missing the point that this shit was called differently in their time. It's not that they don't know the rules. Jordan and Kobe obviously thought the same thing, because they made a point to jump off both feet after pivoting.
The FIBA rules says "Neither foot", Carmelo simply lifts the pivot foot and steps again ( extra step ).. it's a travel.. how is this so hard to get, if you read the initial paragraph it says you are allowed two steps..
Neither foot can return to the ground when you jump. A step is not a jump. That is referring to the FIBA rules, other ones are clearly showcasing legality.
HoopMix I appreciate you coming and checking out the channel. Hopefully you watched the whole video so you have the explanation of the rules and I made a secondary video to clear up this worry of yours th-cam.com/video/vCbAtpVNxjw/w-d-xo.html
I don't know about NBA rules but in FIBA it's not legal unless you jump off the pivot foot. So in effect from both feet. Otherwise its a step. And its a traveling violation. Because its a move of both feet beyond the limits in traveling article.
In the clips they aren’t hopping off both feet. There all doing the same thing, melo’s just is more pronounced because he drives his knee up. ... except kg, he did really go off two. U can even try it, if they go off two there wouldn’t be all that ground covered, just like he says in the video. The second most pronounced is the Kobe clip, he can’t cover that ground simply off two.
This video confused me more. Because when you were comparing Melo's moves and said they were the same, they are actually different. In the first clip he lift his pivot foot while his other is on the ground. In the second, he jumps off both. Also, every clip of NBA players shows they jump off both, which is not a travel. However, Candace Parker's and Melo's first move was a travel
It is very hard to lean forward and jump off of two feet, if you slow it down, two of those moves are off of one. What is confusing, is that people find this to be a travel, but do not realize, that most layups that occur, you step off of your pivot foot and shot with the non-pivot foot
completely wrong 🤣. kg and kobe jumped off two feet clearly. you have to jump off two feet. you have to jump off pivot foot as well as other foot 🤦♂️. not just your other foot like mello. the trainer clearly says you gotta jump off two its simple logic. once your pivot foot is down you can raise it up as in JUMP OFF IT to shoot or pass. think logically of this rule 6:14. so your saying you can establish your pivot foot then raise it in the air stand there like a flamingo on one foot forever then pass or shoot before it returns to the floor no. the next line says if he drops the ball while in the air because thats after you jumped off your pivot foot.
Here is 7 minutes of game film of it occurring in the NBA and NCAA. In addition, a former NBA official and the VP of official development state that it is not a travel: th-cam.com/video/vCbAtpVNxjw/w-d-xo.html.
dude dude Simple logic huh? Did you happen to check out that other video? Anything to say now that he proved you wrong? Or maybe you think Ronnie Nunn and Joe Borgia don't know what they're talking about either? Don't feel too bad, I was just as certain as you... until I realized I was wrong 🤦♂️
I don’t think it’s a travel given what the refs have said. That being said, any time a step through is used is on a layup. I would love to see this done at the top of the key to see if it’s called as a travel or not.
Jumping off two versus jumping off one after switching feet. It’s called a travel in men’s college but not overseas. My teammates from other countries hated that they called it.
@@refereeuniversity it's not a travel, it shouldn't be a travel, and there are many "legal travels" within the game to ensure flow... But this is a slower move that exposes the ball to the defender. The last point is all I care about and why I teach my players not to do it... along with the potential of a ref who doesn't know better calling it a travel. No need to die on this hill when the move isn't necessarily better.
@@stepthroughjoe8815 I think it should be legal per rule... but it's called a travel at lot, can't possibly be scene as legal on other parts of the court, and opens the offensive player up to an increased chance of being blocked. On most every layup, we get to reestablish our pivot twice... and the game is better for it.
When u lift ur pivot foot and take that EXTRA STEP u get away from the defender with more distance compared to jumping with both feet! U have to play basketball to know this!! If u dont play u dont know..
@refereeuniversity ..Ummmm nahhh.. it ain't LEGAL.. IT CLEARLY SAYS ON THE RULE BOOK U CAN ONLY LIFT YR PIVOT TO SHOOT OR PASS, NOT TO TAKE AN EXTRA STEP FOR A LAYUP..
HIS FIRST TWO HIGHLIGHTS OF KOBE AND TONY PARKER…show them jumping off two at the same time. I knew I wasn’t trippin. Taking a complete step is a damn travel.
I’m glad you showed the rules to prove it is legal but in the 3 nba examples you showed they jumped with their pivots still on the floor, bad examples.
Even in the international rule you read, it clearly states that neither foot can touch the ground after your pivot foot leaves the floor, which is why the step through is a travel, because you are returning another foot to the ground after jumping off your pivot foot. Stepping and jumping are the same thing…hence the triple jump that is two steps before a jump.
What I'm understanding is that during a step through, there is always a foot in contact with the ground. You are not lifting the pivot then placing the other foot on the ground. The other foot is already in contact with the ground before the pivot foot is lifted. If the pivot foot is lifted first (jumping, not stepping through), this would be a travel.
Here is a bunch of clear cut ones: th-cam.com/video/vCbAtpVNxjw/w-d-xo.html&ab_channel=RefereeUniversity . Read the pivot definition then read what is required to leave your pivot foot. That will give you the answer to why it is not a travel. All one foot layups require stepping off a pivot foot FYI
Yes, two examples need to be slowed down for it. I made a follow up of clear cut ones th-cam.com/video/vCbAtpVNxjw/w-d-xo.html&ab_channel=RefereeUniversity
RJ, so as per your interpretation in NBA you can continue hopping with your non pivot foot as long as you dont put your pivot foot down? . FIBA rules are clear you need to jump with your pivot foot and in these videos most players lift their pivot and jump with non pivot (and both legs not in the air when pivot lifted) These are travel and consistently also called travel in every fiba game
What Carmelo did is not travel. It just looks weird step because his right foot took a step while his pivot was off the ground. If you clearly see what Kobe did was he took his pivot and other foot off the ground at the same time.
6:12 are we really gonna be blind to this? lol it clearly states that you may “JUMP OFF A PIVOT FOOT”. Clear distinction from the NBA. You cant step through in euro basketball by the FIBA rules. You may JUMP OF THE PIVOT (so either jump only of that foot or of the both feet simultaneously).
@@refereeuniversity Find me the evidence of that. The rule book is clear, you may "jump of a pivot foot" that is a clear distinction from the step through. Plus there is no footage from the euroleague where players do this on game2game basis. I am watching euroleague every week, and this is called a travel every single time (unless they missed it of course) .
@@refereeuniversitycan you respond to this where this is confirmed since I was wondering the same thing. Since with the step through you're not jumping off your pivot foot.
The issue here is about whether you can individually pick up the pivot foot. All the NBA clips you showed were of players jumping off with both feet, something both sides of the debate agree is legal. The question is, can you individually pick up the pivot foot to jump further ahead which intuitively seems like a travel to me.
Stepping off your pivot foot is not an additional step. That is how you do layups and floaters, that is how you do fadeaways. Not an additional step. 2 clips they jumped off of one but you have to slow it down. Here are many examples where it is not called. I think the sample size of called travels are very little. th-cam.com/video/vCbAtpVNxjw/w-d-xo.html&ab_channel=RefereeUniversity
The compelling factor is how you establish the pivot, no? Crab dribble or jump stop into a step through - legal. Two steps into a step through, illegal, on account of player SWITCHING their pivot foot, and therefore constituting a 3 step motion. Can you talk about how you get to the pivot foot? I get that you can raise it...
I’m pleased you posted this clip, but I respectfully have to agree with AB and KG and disagree with you… and it’s disappointing that this issue remains unresolved and refereed inconsistently. You make the most salient point that defeats your own argument at 4:40 in the video, and this is the point disregarded even though it is explicit in several version of the Rules (and implicit in others). You note that … “by lifting the pivot foot the player is able to progress or travel further than if they are forced to jump off the pivot foot or both feet together”… The key point is that they progress or travel in lifting the pivot foot! And in each of your interpretations of the written Rules, you (and many referees including some at the highest levels) have disregarded referring to the fundamental Rule in this circumstance. *In NBA Rules: Rule No.4 - Definitions “Section VIII-Pivot a. A pivot takes place when a player, who is holding the ball, steps once or more than once in any direction with the same foot, with the other foot (pivot foot) in contact with the floor. b. If the player wishes to dribble after a pivot, the ball must be out of his hand before the pivot foot is raised off the floor. If the player raises his pivot off the floor, he must pass or attempt a field goal before the foot is returned to the floor. If he fails to follow these guidelines, he has committed a traveling violation. “Section IX-Traveling Traveling is progressing in any direction while in possession of the ball, which is in excess of prescribed limits as noted in Rule 4-Section VIII and Rule 10-Section XIII.” *In FIBA Rules: “25.1. Definition 25.1.1. Travelling is the illegal movement of one foot or both feet beyond the limits outlined in this article, in any direction, while holding a live ball on the playing court. 25.1.2. A pivot is the legal movement in which a player who is holding a live ball on the playing court steps once or more than once in any direction with the same foot, while the other foot, called the pivot foot, is kept at its point of contact with the floor. 25.2.1. Establishing a pivot foot by a player who catches a live ball on the playing court: • A player who catches the ball while standing with both feet on the floor: …… - To pass or shoot for a field goal, the player may jump off a pivot foot, but neither foot may be returned to the floor before the ball is released from the hand(s).” *In NCAA Rules: “Rule No.4 - Definitions Section 27. Pivot A pivot takes place when a player who is holding the ball steps once or more than once in any direction with the same foot, while the other foot, called the pivot foot, is kept at its point of contact with the playing court.” …and … “Rule 9 - Violations Section 5. Traveling Art. 1. A player shall not travel with the ball. Art. 2. Traveling occurs when a player holding the ball moves a foot or both feet in any direction in excess of prescribed limits described in this section. Art. 3. A player who catches the ball with both feet on the playing court may pivot, using either foot. When one foot is lifted, the other is the pivot foot”. You need to find a way to interpret the selected extracts of the Rules which you quote, without conflicting with the other limits prescribed by the Rules. You must try to interpret the extracts you quote - ‘that a player may lift or jump off the pivot foot, but must release the ball before they land again’ - making it consistent with the following: -without taking the special allowances for receiving or gathering the ball as a moving player -without lifting the pivot foot to progress or travel in any direction (except jumping) *In your reference to the NBA Rule, you conveniently disregard the limits that are prescribed in the Rule 4 Definitions - Sections “VIII - Pivot” and “IX - Travelling” *In your reference to the FIBA Rule, you conveniently disregard the allowance in Rule 25.2.1 is only if the player “jumps off the pivot foot”. *In your reference to the NCAA Rule, you conveniently disregard the Rule 4 definition of “Pivot” definition and Arts. 1,2 &3 of the Travelling violation, and you quote Art 5 only which relates to a different situation. Art.5 follows Art 4 which refers to a player who catches (or gathers) the ball while moving, and Art 5 expands on that situation for that player “after coming to a stop”… Art 5 does not relate in any way to a player who catches the ball while stationary or with both feet on the floor. You say you find the FIBA Rule slightly unclear, but that is because it appears to contradict what you understand the Rules to allow and only because you disregard the key definitions. In contrast, the NBA Rule appears slightly unclear, because it can be (and has been) construed to allow the “travelling Step-Through” which is the very point in contention… but this is clearly contrary to the Rule 4 Definitions and can only make sense if it is written to allow a player to “raise the pivot foot” to pass or shoot only provided they are not progressing in any direction . Finally, your clips of Kevin Garnett doing a ‘step-through’ quite clearly illustrate his attempt to legally jump off both feet following the step-through. The two clips you show ‘side-by-side’ are both contentious - they never agreed the right-side was legal… AB thinks they are both travel violations. It is only the one at 4.07, that Melo legitimately jumps off two feet… that’s what you should be comparing. Of course, referees are only human and the same situation might be perceived differently … but that is not what is being debated here… here you are debating the written Rules and there should be consensus on what the Rules allow.
Appreciate the effort in the response. Completely fine to disagree. I am confused on how some of the rules that define the pivot prior to the point I allude to, changes the meaning? Progressing players are allowed different applications of the rules than someone stationary. If you catch the ball with both feet on the ground, you are not allowed a gather step. If you are progressing, you are allowed a gather step. Same with if you dribble after lifting your pivot foot or if you were to shoot/pass after lifting. The rules have different applications and you cannot use prior explanations on different scenarios to be applied on every completely different scenarios. That is what you are trying to do in these scenarios. Every rule book (except FIBA) clearly allows you to shoot or pass off of your non-pivot foot as long as your pivot foot DOES NOT return to the floor PRIOR to the PASS/SHOT. I appreciate your view, but the rules are written pretty clear. I showcase the unclarity, not to contradict myself, but to show that I believe it can be more clear. At the end of the day, this move has been confirmed by the NBA Referee Operations & Development crew, FIBA head interpreter, and those on the NCAA rules committee. Just because individuals were reffed incorrectly on the rule, does not mean it is correct. You are more than welcome to reach out to your local association and go in more depth conversation with them since online is more difficult. I still see some unclarity in your breakdown and part of it could be my misinterpretation of your written work.
@@refereeuniversity you replied: …“…I am confused on how some of the rules that define the pivot prior to the point I allude to, changes the meaning?...” This is fundamental to the issue at hand… …it is fundamental best practice in writing a set of rules or regulations that you: .1…first, outline the general permissions and/or limitations for the fundamental principle/s to be applied. .2…detail, the relevant exceptions, concessions or enhancements the expand upon the fundamental principle/s Sometimes a body of regulations evolve as a set of disjointed permissions and limitations, and this typically leads to contradictions and confused interpretations. But when a set of rules is “codified” they are put into a structured order and some rules are given priority… subsidiary rules must then be read in conjunction with the general principles outlined in advance. [*Although I’m aware there are actually conflicting cultural factors involved here, where some cultures do follow a weighted principled approach, while others inherently place more weight on the specific detailed permissions and restrictions.] And this is where the confusion arises… -when readers disregard the principal rules and only focus on the specific enhancement rules provided -when readers take the specific enhancement rules out of context from the principal rules -when the numbering of the rules is disregarded or altered and the precedence of certain principal rules re lost. …Rule numbering can be critically important in determining which Rules take precedence!... but that is too often overlooked. Why should your give more weight to these definitions and principal rules when you read subsequent subordinate rules?.... because the rules themselves tell you to? Without reiterating points in my previous response: -NBA rules - Rule 4 are the definitions and general concepts to be applied in the subsequent more detailed specific rules… and “Rule 4 Section IX - Travelling” even states the associated rules to which this fundamental definition shall apply. -FIBA rules - Rule 25.1 outlines the definition and principle and states that it applies to the limits outlined throughout that Article 25… we’re debating interpretation of a specific enhancement in Rule 25.2.1 -NCAA rules - like the NBA rules, Rule 4 provides the definitions and general concepts, and Rule 9 details more specifically the limitations. Now the written FIBA rules DO allow for consistent interpretation on this rule… (that, as written, you can jump off the pivot foot, but cannot step-through off the pivot foot!)… the only things inconsistent in this FIBA rule are: -1) that the ‘official’ interpretation is inconsistent with the written rule… and -2) that it is inconsistent with the way (as you say) NBA and NCAA referees have been advised to interpret the ambiguous contradiction in their rules, and the way you have chosen to interpret that ambiguity. Personally, I would like to becoming more involved in basketball refereeing at a local regional level (drawing on my experience refereeing in another sport at an international level as an internationally accredited referee), but I cannot get past the dilemma of being expected to follow referee guidelines (on this and various other interpretations) that have become inconsistent with the written rules. I would prefer to referee consistent with the written rules and its stated principles, but that would make my refereeing inconsistent with the current practice. There are other significant inconsistencies, in particular where FIBA have appeared to adopt a rule from NBA or NCAA, but re-written it in a different form and making its FIBA interpretation inconsistent with the BNA or NCAA origin. And in the context of writing and interpreting regulations, I iterate my points above drawing on: 1) my general professional experience with law consulting; and 2) my personal involvement in international referee panels reviewing and writing international refereeing interpretations and rules for another sporting discipline…. It is incredibly difficult to develop rules and interpretations that are concise and easily-readable but also unambiguous… and that is before we even try to translate them into other languages… we were once shown 5 distinct German versions of our international rules which had each been translated in good faith from the English version!
@@troylipsham4365 I can understand that your background in law may have a different way of laying out the restrictions and allowances in the court of law. Maybe the order of laws/rules are different and you are trying to convince me of a point that I will never have full understanding of since I am not a lawyer. What I do know is that if I ever felt like there was unclarity, I could bring it to those that are in the position of writing the rules for the world and gather their interpretation. If I was to try and comprehend how you process things, I would go to the NBA rule book under traveling. It states: "A player who receives the ball while standing still may pivot, using either foot as the pivot foot." Since that is the first point in the article and the definition both do not state that I cannot have more than one pivot foot. It says I can choose. Technically, I can keep switching them. No where does it say I cannot switch them. Regardless it specifically states twice that you can lift your pivot foot as long as you shoot or pass before it touches the ground. The step through is lifting your pivot foot and shooting before it comes back down. I do not understand how there is so much confusion? We do it all the time with layups, we step off the pivot foot and finish off our non pivot foot. The confusion should only occur under FIBA rules because it states to jump off.
@@refereeuniversity This raises several further relevant points... 1..The written rules should be clear enough in themselves... there shouldn't be much need to seek clarification from those in positions of writing. 2..The biggest issue with that is when those in charge of interpretation deviate from or disregard certain written rules, and then there is more inconsistency. 3..You have chosen to refer only to Rule10-Section XIII, and disregarding the preceding Rule 4 Sections VIII & IX which set out the principle and definition of the Pivot and Travelling.... this clearly states you may step once or more with the SAME foot, with the OTHER (PIVOT) foot in contact with the floor. It does say you can't exceed these limits... you can't switch pivot foot. 4..The allowance for lifting the pivot foot for a player in motion, is a concession on the fundamental rule to allow for continuity of movement and protect from injuries that would arise if required to make more abrupt stops upon receiving the ball... it is a special concession and is clearly separated from the fundamental limits on a player who is or stationary or comes to a stop. 5..I recall when I refereed basketball 30 years ago, this step-through was a violation... I returned to basketball in the past 5 years in a coaching role (after 30 years involved in another sport) and I noted a number of local players (particularly women) using a step-thru from a stationary catch or after several pivots following a stop - sometimes penalised but typically not... I referred back to the rules comparing it to my old rulebook from the 80s to see what allowed this 'newer interpretation'... It is clearly evident that a specific concession has been taken and applied out of context, and a whole generation of new referees have been indoctrinated with an interpretation which is inconsistent with the fundamental rule. 6..The confusing is obvious... a large group of players and coaches and referees have been coached and refereed where this 'step-through' is regarded as a violation and this is consistent with a reading of the written rules... but we have another generation who have been coached and refereed that it is allowable and this is consistent with current higher level technical interpretation (but this interpretation can only be achieved by reading certain rules in isolation and out of context of the general principles of the rules involved). 5..Again the confusion you see in the FIBA rule is only because you are trying to interpret it consistent with your interpretation (which you appear to draw primarily from the NBA rulebook and unwritten official interpretation). The FIBA rulebook is the more relevant for me (in NZ), and as you note its use of the word "jump" rather than "lift" takes away some of the arguments for a step-thru to be allowed... however some ambiguity remains and in any and all cases consistency with all the relevant written rules can only be achieved if the step-thru is only allowed for a player already in motion, and is deemed a violation for a player who is stationary or has come to a stop and pivoted on a pivot foot. I chose to raise these points on your post because you do some excellent work sharing interpretation of the rules, and it seems futile trying to reason with the newer generation of referees... too many learn the rules mainly from word-of-mouth and have not comprehensively read the relevant rulebook, and those few who understand the inconsistency seem to avoid the issue by making it a "no-call". I perhaps hoped you might look at it objectively and shared the fact that the current 'official' interpretation creates its own contradiction in the rules. There are 5 or 6 things that arise in a debate like this: -what the written rules actually say (and which set of rules are we using) -how are those written rules being interpreted (in discussion) -are the interpretations consistent with the written rules -how are those rules actually being applied (in practical refereeing)... which rules are being neglected or disregarded -what is possible for the referee to actually see and judge in real-time -what should the rules actually allow So far I have focussed on what's written, interpreted, and the inconsistencies arising... but for the record, I would prefer that the step-thru is a violation for a player who catches the ball stationary or has come to a stop and established a pivot - except for the concession allowed for a player already in motion, the pivot foot must not visibly been lifted from the floor while the other foot remains in contact with the floor - this can be applied consistently with each current version of the rules (NBA, FIBA, NCAA) - all that is needed is to correct the current 'official' (mis)interpretation that conflicts with the fundamental rules. If however, they are going to continue with the current 'official' interpretation, then they should more clearly specify this exception in the rules to remove ambiguity and contradiction with the fundamental rules... it would just require a more definitive statement that "at any time a player with the ball who is stationary or pivoting may travel one step in any direction (by stepping out away from and lifting the pivot foot) in order to shoot or pass the ball, (but not to commence a dribble)". [And that raises one final point... why the inconsistency in interpretation between a pass or shot and dribble - why do the rules and interpretations make it a violation to step (not jump) off the pivot to dribble, but not if you shoot or pass... historically these were consistent that you could not lift your pivot with the other foot still on the floor to initiate any of these things... but because rules were more specific about a 'dribble' but slightly ambiguous about passing or shooting the rule has become abused and applied and refereed inconsistently.]
Just to be sure: It doesn't matter whether you have dribbled or not before you make your step through, right? Fx Candace at 1.30 haven't dribbled before resting the ball in her hands and thereafter making the step-through move - This is legal, correct?
fiba rule is not as clear as other 2. its says "may jump off pivot foot" which could be interpreted as pivot foot has to be on the ground when jump is made
Ok but how do you dribble after the pivot? You catch ball, pivot , pump fake, step and dribble once, land on both feet and layup. My question is, do you dribble after or before you take a step with your free foot or at the same time?
The 3 examples (Ginobli, Kobe, TMac) are all proving KG's point that you can step thru but have to jump off BOTH feet. Candace is stepping thru, lifting her pivot foot, and jumping off 1 foot. You have yet to provide a step thru example in the NBA similar to the one Candace provided.
Gear bottom right in video and alter the playback speed. At least 2 of the players end up taking off one foot, nearing impossible to attack towards the hoop without taking off of one. I made a video of clearcut ones to help: th-cam.com/video/vCbAtpVNxjw/w-d-xo.html&ab_channel=RefereeUniversity
does that mean that you could stay on the foot that you step through with (the non pivot foot) for as long as you'd like? not sure how useful it would be just curious. also I mean if you stay on that one foot and not put your pivot back down
As long as the pivot foot stays established (in contact with the ground) any step taken with the other foot is considered to be the 2nd step. You can take 8 2nd steps as long as that pivot stays down. There’s no illegal 3rd step unless the pivot is raised and returned to the floor before releasing the ball. You could take 8 2nd steps then pause with your pivot foot in the air for as long as you want (before getting a 3 or 5 second violation) then jump off your 2nd foot and shoot or pass. Nothing in the rules says it has to be a fluid motion or look natural. That type of thing just isn’t practical. That’s why it’s never done.
Not a travel rules state that you can pickup your pivot foot to attemp a pass or a field goal as long as your pivot foot doesnt touch the ground before the attemp easy call
What about Luka’s fade away jump shot. He always brings up his right leg first and shoot off his left, sometimes without bringing the left foot off the ground.
Based on these rules and Melo's example, Melo could have NOT shot after the cross-over and just balanced himself on his right foot and not incur a traveling call just because he keeps his left foot in the air?
In the rule you kept reading out so clearly you proved that it in fact is a travel. It says you have to jump off your pivot foot. Not take a step and jump off your non pivot foot. If you jump from your pivot foot on the ground it isn't a travel if you step like melo was it is a travel. You talked about taking steps to do a lay up or a floater. That is different bc you are dribbling the ball and picking it up to take 2 steps to shoot or pass. That is different than pivoting and taking two steps to pass or shoot (which isn't allowed either).
A travel is based on bringing your pivot foot back down before releasing the ball. Melo's move is not a travel. He grabs the ball with his left foot on the floor, establishing his left foot as his pivot and then he takes a legal step with his right foot and jumps off of it. He never brought is pivot foot back down before releasing the ball so it's not a travel.
25.2.1 says player may jump off a pivot foot. the problem is, they're jumping off the next step after the pivot foot so technically, the other foot has already returned to the ground before the ball left his hand. Carmelo travelled.
That is a FIBA rule, which means it would not be applicable to anyone playing in the states. Secondly, FIBA has stated that a step through is not a player jumping off their pivot foot, it's someone stepping off of it, which makes the move legal.
Around 6 minutes ur explaining the rules very well. But ur aren't even mentioning the fact that stepping off of the completely other foot makes it a 3rd step making it a travel.
No, it doesn’t. While the pivot foot is established any step taken with the other foot is the 2nd step. It doesn’t matter how many 2nd steps there are. There’s not a 3rd step unless the established pivot foot is raised and returned to the floor before releasing the ball.
@@paulmayer8654 You are wrong. After dribbling, you can take two or three steps, and then take a shot or pass the ball. However, when you did not complete the final action, you stopped midway. At this time, your feet touched the ground and your hands were holding the ball. The subsequent movements have nothing to do with lay up--012. Use the pivot foot rule instead. Because both feet touch the ground, the pivot foot must be established.
@@paulmayer8654 25.2.1. Pivot foot rule, you can raise your pivot foot to shoot or pass, but before either foot touches the ground. When you lift your pivot foot, your another foot just on the ground.
@@rogerhuang9760 you don't understand what the word "may" means if that's what you think. "May jump off the pivot" is very different than must jump. All that's doing is giving an example of something that's legal. Coming to a stop adds the 0 to the beginning, bu nothing after that changes with the pivot rules. 0,1,2,2,2,2 is most definitely allowed. That's still 2 official steps in the rulebook. Step 2 functions the same as if you start from a stop. If you start from a stop though, all you get is step 2. That's the difference between being able to come to a stop or starting from a stop... The extra step you get. When you start from a stop and maintain the pivot foot, the player can take step 2, 2, 2, 2 and still do anything he wants. If the pivot comes up (same as step 1 after coming to a stop) he just must release the ball (and not be the first player to touch it) before his pivot touches the ground again. Picking up the pivot is NEVER considered to be a step unless it's returned to the ground.
It's not a travel. However if you dribble didn't jump stopped then that move is dead and it is travel as soon as you choose a pivot foot what you cannot anymore after a jump stop it is a travel. But what Miss Parker did is clean. The rules states that a player May lift his pivot foot to shoot or pass the ball, but not to dribble
It's tricky on game speed and inexperienced referee might call it. Even a pump fake and jab dribble and step back is called. It's always upon the whistle. But rulebookwise it's not a travel.
In all the nba highlight clips they jump off two feet. According to the actual rule in the nba it's NOT a travel, but I've seen it called many times. The unspoken "jump off two feet" rule seems to apply in the nba
2 clips they jumped off of one but you have to slow it down. Here are many examples where it is not called. I think the sample size of called travels are very little. th-cam.com/video/vCbAtpVNxjw/w-d-xo.html&ab_channel=RefereeUniversity
@@refereeuniversity awesome compilation!! This is exactly what I've been looking for. Thanks a lot!
@@refereeuniversity I think the issue is recently this changed were it's not called, but it used to, that's why we all thought it was, and everybody calls it in pickup. Watch older clips from players like Kobe and Jordan and you can tell they made a point not to do that, there is a reason so many people think it's a travel. The game is different now.
The clips you showed are all new clips so I don't see what they prove.
For real, you have any idea how many more dunks and points someone like Jordan would've had in their career if they did this type of step through where the pivot foot is lifted ?
@@Dru_Won This move doesn't change Jordan's ability to score. Practically all of Jordan's poster dunks are off of 2 feet= Balance and probably more power is why he opted for it.
I don’t play basketball but was genuinely curious to find out the truth.. What he did was completely legal in the NBA and is not considered a travel. As long as he passes or shoots when lifting the pivot foot it is a 100% legal.
Yes. Not sure why this is so hard to understand
@@shaynelhta it's hard for people to understand because if you read the rule, it says you can lift the pivot to pass or shoot. It says nothing about taking an additional step thru before shooting. I don't think anything like that was allowed in the past. If that's allowed now, it should say so explicitly in the rule.
Thank you for clarifying (btw. the euro is a perfect example for NOT having to jump of both feet).
BTW: The Fiba-wording of 'jump' is unfortunately less clear than the NBA/NCAA pendant 'lift'.
I suspect different reasons for those widespread misconceptions (also reg. other rules):
1.) THEY NEVER LOOK INTO THE RULE BOOK! ... it's amazing how even professionals can do the "yes-no-yes-no-dance" for half an hour without referring to the specific wording of the rules (which would cost 2 minutes).
2.) Communicating in 'hip talk' instead of the terms of the rules; instead of 'pivot foot', 'lifting', jumping', 'act of shooting', ... a lot of discussions are based on 'hop step', 'euro', 'up and under', 'jab', .... while those maybe helpful when training a specific technique, they are notsuitable fpr discussing rules.
3.) bad refs / calls or playing without refs: ...
All this leads to uninformed rumors spreading wild.
Yes, I even double check with a FIBA representative if the step through is allowed due to the jump wording. They confirmed it is allowed and when they mean jump, they interpret it as a physical jump/leap forward (like a bound) opposed to stepping forward to finish.
1. Yes, they tend to learn from on court experiences or what they have seen be called as opposed to actually reading the rule book. That is where I see the most issue is for misinformation.
I see your point but in the Up and Under compilation literally every player in each clip jump off of 2 feet and not 1. I haven’t see this move being done until 2020 in the NBA tbh and they’ve been travel calls sometimes
Thank you for commenting this. I noticed every in game movement they jumped off 2 feet.
here are 500 examples of stepthroughs off one.
th-cam.com/video/C3w5U7vC0w4/w-d-xo.html
Holy shit amen. Every clip that he showed trying to back up his point were players jumping off of 2 feet and not doing the so-called step through.
Slow down footage, one foot. More clear cut examples: th-cam.com/video/vCbAtpVNxjw/w-d-xo.html&ab_channel=RefereeUniversity
Slow down footage, one foot. More clear cut examples: th-cam.com/video/vCbAtpVNxjw/w-d-xo.html&ab_channel=RefereeUniversity
Can’t believe how many times I’ve been called for traveling doing this move
Clearly nobody watched Kobe
all the calls were correct. there is no point in having a pivot foot if an additional step would be allowed.
Stepping off your pivot foot is not an additional step. That is how you do layups and floaters, that is how you do fadeaways. Not an additional step.
@@refereeuniversity actually i watched another video and it helped me to understand the difference. so now I understand the rule and your point is legit and correct. I was shocked quite a lot actually of getting to know the actual rule. yet most of the people do not know it and will continue not knowing it
@@seriousdeep1753 I don't mean any disrespect to anyone. but. jumping off the pivot foot means just that. you have to jump using your pivot foot. not take a whole step then jump off that foot that wasn't even your pivot. like the Melo example, off course it's a travel. he didn't jump off his pivot foot. he took a whole nother step and jumped off that foot that he took the step with. he didn't jump off his pivot foot.
Love DJ Sackmann telling them what's what. 'You can lift that pivot but you put it back down." DJ is one of the best out there.
Great video! I was just arguing about this with some guys I play ball with. I like how multiple people commented that you were misinterpreting the rule so you posted another video that conclusively shows they're actually the ones who are wrong. A week ago I would have said this was a travel, now I have no doubt that it's a legal move.
travel 100%. the rule as shown in this video you can jump off your pivot foot. meaning you can jump off of that foot specifically. it doesn't say you can take a step, then jump off of that foot that you took a step with. it's simple enough.
@@EddieDuranLLC I sympathize with your position because it took me a while to accept the truth but it's definitely not a travel. The wording in the NCAA rule book is the most clear. It doesn't say "you can jump off your pivot foot" but instead says "the pivot foot may be lifted" as long as it doesn't come back down before you pass or shoot. You get 2 steps whenever you pass or shoot and the pivot foot "may be lifted" during that process as long as it doesn't come back down.
This channel has another great video showing multiple in-game examples of legal up and under moves using this technique. About a minute in there's a clip of a former referee explaining why it's a legal move. Here's a link to that video... th-cam.com/video/vCbAtpVNxjw/w-d-xo.html
Then here's another video on a different channel that also has a great explanation and features an NCAA ref. Pay special attention around the 6 minute mark where he talks about a regular layup. That's what really made it click for me. Let me know what you think... th-cam.com/video/UUgRw8JeSwk/w-d-xo.html
@@_JellyDonut_ it does say pivot may be lifted. but that only means you can lift it if you jump off both feet to take a jumpsuit or a jump pass. the rule has to say that because if you jump to take a shot or a pass and come back down, it's a travel. everyone says the pivot foot may be lifted, yes that's true it says that. but the pivot can be lifted to jump or pass if you jump off both feet. nowhere I'm amy rule book does it say you can take a step. it just says you may lift the pivot. meaning you can jump off the tripple threat position to take a effing jumpshot or a pass. no effing extra step allowed. nowhere.
@@_JellyDonut_ "the pivot foot may be lifted" ok, where does it say you can lift it after taking a step? it's very fuking simple. yes it can be lifted if you jump off 2 feet. and don't return to the ground with the ball. I'm all honesty people just don't know ball and don't have reading comprehension. I'm spelling it out for you.
@@EddieDuranLLC It's funny that you would be rude about it when you're so obviously wrong. Did I say anything vulgar or disrespectful to you? Anyway if you watched those videos and you still don't understand then I'm not sure what else to say. You said "people don't know ball" but the videos I linked to both feature professional refs. Are you saying they don't know basketball? How about the guy who runs this channel, which is called Referee University. Are you suggesting you know more about the rules than him?
It doesn't say anywhere in the rule book you have to jump off both feet when lifting your pivot foot. If it did then you wouldn't be able to take two steps for a layup, which you obviously can. It just says "the pivot foot may be lifted" which clearly indicates that you can pick up your pivot foot, regardless of what your other foot is doing, as long as you don't put it back down before you pass or shoot. Let's make this simple. If you're only allowed to lift your pivot foot when jumping off two feet then how it is legal to take two steps on a layup?
Before his pivot foot returns to the floor? Does that mean you can leap on the other foot through the whole court?
There is another rule that does not allow consecutive jumping off of the same foot, so no it would not be legal
Finally!!! Thank you! I get so tired of uninformed players calling travel when I pick up my pivot foot and jump off the opposite foot. I tell them you don’t travel by picking it up but by putting it down. And then they start making up rules about why I got a jump off both feet simultaneously which is literally impossible.
Yup! As long as you shoot or pass (not dribble), you are completely fine!
@@refereeuniversity imo all 3 nba clips show players jumping off of both feet no matter how much you slow it down. I came to this video Bc I did not know the rules on this matter and learned from you that it is legal in NBA, WNBA, and college. However, I have to disagree with the legality in fiba. the fiba rule book sample you provided states that you have to “jump” off of your pivot foot and neither foot can make contact with the ground before the ball is released. So if a player establishes a pivot foot and then takes a step, they have just made contact with that foot and left there pivot which is a travel. Also, taking a step towards the basket with the non-pivot is not considered a “jump” so it seems like it should clearly be illegal in fiba. Can you explain how it would be considered legal according to the fiba rulebook?
@@alexcepeda3439 We can disagree on the first point and I can show you still frames for proof if you would like. I agree with you, FIBA's writing of the rule gives that interpretation, that it can be deemed not allowed. Even known referees do not call it and most people seem to believe it is allowed, I contacted FIBA rep's about it. I asked for clarification or at least considering the rule change. Here is the answer I was given:
Key to a legal step through - is that the player steps off the non-pivot foot - he does not jump off the pivot foot.
We don’t need to split hairs is there is a split second that both feet are off the ground - before jumping off the non-pivot foot - but it is a step - not a jump or hop - thus the rule language is valid:
"To pass or shoot for a field goal, the player may jump off a pivot foot, but neither foot may be returned to the floor before the ball is released from the hand(s)."
Saying that because the rule says jump and not step, that a step through is valid. Hope that helps.
Lol got 6th graders who figured out how to jump off 2 feet “literally impossible” smh
@@refereeuniversity nobody lifted their pivot foot in the NBA videos you showed , they all basically went off 2 feet. Yea an up and under /step through has always been a thing , but as these videos shows - players have always been taught to jump off two feet and not lift the pivot. Like Kobe wasn't doing the same thing as Candace Parker here, at all
Melo was indeed correct
In high school I was thought that picking up the pivot is an automatic travel. It was like an unspoken rule. I wish I would have known the truth so that I could have implemented this move into my game
High school coaches are just casual nba fans too, they probably don’t know better honestly 🤷🏽♂️.
@@opeyemibajowa9089 it is a travel, the only way this is not a travel is when you jump off two feet, know the rules kid
@@opeyemibajowa9089 you can even see it when KG goes it, lmao this guy showed how to properly do it, and that is when you jump off two feet la
@@lautaroontiveros9975 you are wrong. Read the rules in the video kid.
They would've called it on you.
Kg jumped off two
Do not worry, I made a 6 min video of multiple clear cut examples of them going off of one foot. th-cam.com/video/vCbAtpVNxjw/w-d-xo.html. Thanks!
@@refereeuniversitystill a travel.. neither foot can touch after the pivot is picked up.. clearly stated in the rules. What's not to get about that
This video is 100% correct. The “lift your pivot foot to shoot or pass” concept is the basis for all the basic shots. Layups. Jump shots. Up and under. Fade away. EVERYTHING. So many people don’t understand the basic rules of footwork it is embarrassing. Every move you know is derived from this basic principle.
A pivot is not exclusively a rotation of your foot/body. I can step back and then take a giant step forward and then back again as many times as I want as long as my pivot remains in the same spot. These are not steps.
If refs are calling this move a travel they are not good refs.
OMG thank you so much for such a great breakdown w the exact rules and all!!!
In HS they will call this a Walk. In the NBA they won’t, it’s that simple. It looks like a travel to me but who know? All these “new” rules is why NBA players are impossible to stop
its legal in the hs rules. ur hs just pays random ass homless dudes $20 bucks to officiate
We taught this move in HS for years. The rule is the same across all federations with regard to releasing the pivot foot, ie the up and under is clean.
So, get your ref before the game, demonstrate the move, ask what is not allowed... and get a printout of the rules. Educate the fools. It's a school!
I’ve always played like this, but one thing bothers me after actually seeing the text that’s supposed to make the move legal. It never explicitly states that you can keep your non pivot foot on the floor, just that you can jump off a “pivot foot” (which is clearly defined in the preceding text/section as one foot which is achorex to the ground. It seems that the text of the rule is more clarifying that you can jump to shoot once you’ve run out of dribbles instead of somehow making stepthroughs/ dirk fades/ sombor shuffles legal). And considering that FIBA has a rule that you can’t switch pivots/take a step without releasing the ball for a dribble (the exact footwork used in a step through but you dribble instead of shoot), and that the FIBA text is less step-through friendly, it seems like it should 100% be illegal there. I know it’s not reffed that way, but the text is really unsettling
Yes, I agree that the FIBA written rule makes it seem like those moves are illegal. I asked someone in FIBA why it’s written like that, and they said it’s because they determine a step to be different than a jump. Thats why it’s written that jumping off the pivot is the only thing making it illegal, and they don’t see those moves to be jumping off a pivot, only stepping. I think they should mimic the NBA rule on pivots to provide more clarity and consistency. Especially since they allow these moves
“They say jumping off the pivot foot is the only thing making it illegal”
What ???
@referee University I have a question.
If you keep reading the Fiba rules, this is also in section 25.2.1. It sounds like this move is totally legal if done after catching the ball, but not after finishing a dribble.
- A player who catches the ball while he is progressing, or upon completion of a dribble, may take two steps in coming to a stop, passing or shooting the ball:
- If the player who comes to a stop on his first step has both feet on the floor or they touch the floor simultaneously, he may pivot using either foot has his pivot foot. If he then jumps with both feet, no foot may return to the floor before the ball is released from the hand(s).
If you watch Embiid's footwork he does the step through up and under after finishing his own dribble. I think the rule indicates what's now called "step 0". For example let's say you dribblling to the right with a step 0; step to the left with your left foor and catch/finish dribbling in the same time, this is step 1; and you can still take one more step to either direction using your right foot, and that's step 2; basically the two steps are determined by "completion of a dribble", players with great handles can utilize that step 0 and timing of completion of dribble to do different kind of layups and footworks. Joel Embiid and Giannis if I recalled right does this a lot.
Yes, FIBA's wording should be altered to reflect what they allow. I brought the same concern due to it discussing off of the pivot foot. They said the intent is to hop off the foot, not step
There’s nothing there to suggest that coming to a stop changes anything. That last section is merely qualifying how to identify the pivot foot in that circumstance. There’s no change to what can be done with the pivot.
This is called a travel by most people who played ball in the 80s, 90s, and 00s. It is always an argument mostly with the younger generation that has played ball in the 10s and 20s. This was ALWAYS a travel back in the day. Younger generation wouldn't know because they weren't around. That is why everyone that did an up and under jumped with both feet. It was understood that once that pivot foot left the ground you had to be in the air shooting or passing.
If you actually stepped through, you had in essence switched your pivot foot and the ref was immediately blowing the whistle.
I'm not sure if the rule has changed but if not, the interpretation of the rule definitely has changed and the younger players are playing by the new interpretation while the older players and refs are mostly struggling with changing how they have experienced this basketball rule most of their lives.
pivot rule 25.2.1. no change since 2017 to now.
interpretation from players and referees have changed, we could debate on why: education, misunderstanding, apply rule sets that referees called on them that were incorrect... regardless, you need to be able to step off a pivot foot to be able to do a layup, it has been legal since the start by rule. Only major change added would be the 0 step due to the athleticism of players.
Great video. Sadly much needed even in 2020 it seems... Personally I think there are two relevant clauses in the rulebook, the one in the video (25.2.1 first bullet third bar) and a later one for a progressing player (25.1.2 second bullet fourth bar). Notice the difference "the player may jump off a pivot foot, but neither foot may be..." vs "If he then jumps with both feet, but neither foot may be..." which clears up any doubts re step-2 being legal on the step-through. All in all my reading is that it doesn't say it's illegal, it conforms to the principles of pivots and layups we find elsewhere in the rules so it is legal as we know and apply day in day out.
If 0:35 is legal (in compliance with 25.2.1. Pivot foot rule), then I got the ball on the spot without moving or dribbling (in compliance with 25.2.1.PIVOT RULE at this time), and then wait for 3 seconds or 5 seconds. , then take another step, then jump up on the pivot foot and shoot(just like 0:35). Don’t you think it’s ridiculous? FOR 25.2.1. People need to jump both feet.
Based on the examples from the video:
Candice lifted pivot and took 1 extra step
KG says its a travel
All the nba & wnba footages shown in the video show player jump off 2 feet when pivot lifted.
The rule on all 3 levels clearly says:
"Established pivot foot can be lifted but CANNOT LAND before a shot or a pass. It does not say before ONE MORE STEP."
The exception is only made for pass and shot, not step.. otherwise, you could lift pivot, hop infinite times on the other feet, before taking that shot.
Taking off with two feet is already the damn loop hole that pushed this rule.. lets not introduce step through as legal..
Slow down the video and they take off one. Almost impossible to take off of two with a forward momentum. Additionally, most layups require lifting the pivot foot. Lifted pivot foot is a step through, it’s not one more step. It’s the same allocated step you get with a jab. Step throughs are legal
True. But crazy to me because I started playing basketball in 1991 I just found out you can lift up your pivot foot.
I tried to explain to the young people that they had to take off with both feet simultaneously like we used to do and like Kobe does.
@@flyingisland7583 Both work
i've watched and played basketball quite a long time, i didn't know a step through was legal either until someone recently told me. i am kind of blown away to get this wrong. less embarrassing to know at least some of the nba was wrong too. i probably got my thinking from what was said in games 20 years ago but who knows. i wonder how many players didn't take advantage of this move thinking it wasn't legal
NBA: 5:54 - the move is NOT a travel because the wording is “raises” his pivot foot.
FIBA - 6:10 - the move IS a travel because the wording is “jump” off a pivot foot. Melo’s move is not a jump off of the pivot foot, it’s a jump off of the non pivot foot.
NCAA - 6:30 - the move is NOT a travel because the wording is “may be lifted” referring to the pivot foot.
I learned something new today, thanks.
FIBA should clean up it's written rules to avoid confusion. By the written word, I agree, it sounds like that would be a travel. However, I brought this concern to a FIBA rules rep.
International rules talk about jumping off your pivot foot, not stepping. You can step through because you are stepping off your pivot foot and not jumping. Legal action. Direct interpretation from a FIBA rules official.
You’re still misinterpreting the FIBA rule. “May jump” off the pivot foot after coming to a stop does not mean MUST jump off the pivot. “May” means something is allowed, but it does not ever mean that it’s required. It does not matter which foot is jumped off as long as the pivot isn’t returned to the ground before the ball is released by a shot or pass.
@@refereeuniversitythe problem is that people read “may jump” and take that as meaning the action must be a jump. The word “may” never means that though. It’s literally just giving an example of an allowable action. When the wording right after that says “shall not” return the pivot to the ground, that’s the only requirement being given.
I know I'm late, but I'm a little confused. According to the rule book you can lift your pivot foot as long as you don't put it back down. So can you go thru with your opposite foot (non pivot) and just stay on one leg as long as you don't place the pivot back down? If so that's an additional step and can be taken advantage of
Yes you can stay standing on it but no it is not an additional step. You were always allowed the second step.
@@refereeuniversity as the NBA/NCAA rule is written, it seems like you could keep hopping on one foot (the non pivot foot) and as long as you shoot or pass before returning your pivot foot to the floor, you're ok? I'm sure that's not the intent, but I can't see how it's disallowed based on the wording.
@@dnellie86 hopping on one foot is seen as a jump, hence why it's not specified.
@@younesbarakat1395 My bad, I missed this part of rules: "h. Upon ending his dribble or gaining control of the ball, a player may not touch the
floor consecutively with the same foot (hop)."
If it is made of the drible or after catching the ball while moving it is just a slowed down two step move (leading up to layup, dunk, passing, fadeaway, floater, etc). It can't be done without a drible when you are standing with both feet on the floor and with the ball in your hands.
Yes
Now the next question is, can I lift up my pivot foot *before* I plant the opposite foot, and shoot after I jump off the opposite foot? By the NBA rule, I can, because I shot the ball "before my pivot foot returns to the floor". But this is incredibly silly: I am basically allowed to perform a two-step layup after a gather (pivot-opposite-shoot), with my opposite foot starting behind my body to give me momentum for the first jump from my pivot foot.
In fact, by this wording, I can literally jump around the court 1-legged with my opposite foot however I want, and shoot the ball "before my pivot foot returns to the floor." Am I right?
If I read your question right then yes you can. It is similar to a fast break layup that you lift your pivot foot before jumping off your opposite foot.
For question 2, it would violate the same foot consecutively rule. You cannot step with the same foot consecutively after the completion of a dribble which would render that a travel. You could stand like a flamingo though :)
bruh the NBA rules says you can lift your pivot foot and is only deemed as travel if your pivot foot is down before you shoot or pass. But the rules say you can't change your pivot foot. You have to jump off with both feet to hit a jumper.
@@Viinhachu right. This is my understanding. At the point you have “stepped through” onto that other foot, and lifted your pivot, you have now established a new pivot foot on that other foot. Which would deem it a travel
@@Viinhachu A pivot is the legal movement in which a player who is holding a live ball on the
playing court steps once or more than once in any direction with the same foot, while
the other foot, called the pivot foot, is kept at its point of contact with the floor.
fiba rules on travelling.
So by my understanding, a pivot foor is only established when u can pivot with that foot. In the case you described, you lift your pivot foot, but your second foot doesn't become a pivot foot since you cannot pivot with that foot (meaning that if i lift my pivot foot i cannot put it down again, so the other foot doesnt become a pivot foot).
@@stevenbolewicki2289 same thing i answered to the person above you. A pivot foot is not a foot that is on the ground, its the foot that stands still while you can take many steps with the other foot
There actually is three different moves going on in this video. The pivot double jump 《that the trainers approve as pivot not lifted before two footed jump), the step that occurs without both feet coming off the ground at the same time and the
pivot is obviously off ground (the girl does this one)., and the most effective and advantageous version - the longer one footed hop step off the pivot in which both feet come off the ground and the non pivot foot jumps alone. The trainers are confused between the last two as the guy in black is doing both but is original move is the hop. To me, re first is all good, the second is iffy depending on rule book, and the third is always a travel as it's a jump.
Rule says you can leave you pivot foot to shoot or pass before it returns to the ground. Legal play
I had a ref in high school calling travels on me when I did this. Passed me off cause it’s not like I can stop to give them basketball lessons
😂😂😂
Good cuz it's a travel
You could, and should've. Grab the rulebook and educate them. Refs are human too and will be wrong too. Especially since rules change. If you have an experienced ref (10+ years of experience)... chances are he may remember the rule as it was 10 years ago. Maybe the rule has changed...
The question should be are you allowed to take an extra step by stepping off pivot. If you jump off both feet to pass or shoot its good but once pivot foot is established you may not step off to then take extra step to shoot or pass layup etc
You can cause thats how layups and fadeaways work
The FIBA rule simply seems unclear to me. It says you can't land with any foot after jumping of your pivot foot. It ignores the possibility of jumping of the pivot foot while leaving the other one on the ground ,which seems to be the main factor in this whole controversy. That makes the rule unspecific and open to interpretation.
Yes the FIBA rules are not written to perfection and I have suggested that some alterations be made. The confusion mostly occurs within the USA on legality. I believe in places that play FIBA, they were taught the step through and the referees know that it is not a travel so most people tend to have the understanding that a step through is legal. I guess in the states it gets called and trainers teach players to hop off of both feet because they assume lifting your pivot foot is a travel. That is just a theory on why it has so much controversy in the states but now back to the rule at hand.
I brought up a similar concern on the writing of the FIBA rule. I understood why step throughs are legal but felt the jump off the pivot foot is a little confusing so I brought it to someone higher up on the FIBA chain. Here it is:
To pass or shoot for a field goal, the player may jump off a pivot foot, but neither foot may be returned to the floor before the ball is released from the hand(s).
Picture the player, back to the basket. Holding ball. Pivots 180 degrees - right foot stays down, now he jab steps with the left foot - and then extends the left foot forward, lifts the right (rear & pivot) foot leaving the ground from the left (front - non-pivot) foot - releasing the ball before either foot returns to the floor. Legal no violation of the rule as he did not “jump off the pivot foot”.
He could also make the same move as follows.
Start facing the basket - jab with the left - then take an extended step jumping of the left (front - non-pivot) foot - releasing the ball before either foot returns to the floor. Legal no violation of the rule. He did not “jump off the pivot foot”.
Now - both moves could be made and the ball released with the left (front - non-pivot) foot - still on the ground releasing the ball before either foot returns to the floor. Legal no violation of the rule. He did not “jump off the pivot foot”.
Now - picture this - facing the basket - jab with the left - jump into the air - both feet off the ground - right rear pivot foot last on the ground - and then the jump (really now a ”hop”) takes him 10 feet left - he returns the left foot to the ground - still holding the ball - clear of any defender. Violation - he jumped off the pivot foot and returned to the floor creating a clear advantage.
If he made this same move going forward we still have the same problem - if he jumps, hops, leaps 12 feet forward and returns to the floor with the ball he gains an advantage not intended by the rule.
Key to a legal step through - is that the player steps off the non-pivot foot - he does not jump off the pivot foot.
I see the confusion in the wording but you cant jump off the pivot foot with the other foot on the ground. If the other foot is on the ground then you didn't jump, because you are still on the ground. That would mean that all you did was lift your pivot foot. The problem seems to be that they don't specify that lifting your pivot foot to pass and shot isn't a travel as the NBA and NCAA did
Logically though I don't think it would be a travel because it isn't a new step. For example if your left is you pivot foot and you are stepping with you right with your left foot down it isn't a travel. That would mean that your right foot was step two which is legal. If you pick up your left foot (pivot foot) and it doesn't come back down, then that's still only two steps. So why would it be a travel?
Yeah according to these rules while you are pivoting you can lift your pivot foot up and stand with your other foot only and it wouldn't be a travel. They should change the rule as" if your pivot foot is up and another part of your body is in contact with the ground, it is a travel." because that is how the rule is applied all over the world, and makes more sense from a basketball standpoint.
I don’t think it’s confusing at all. If you “jump”, that means both feet are airborne. Therefore, “jumping” off the pivot foot means you’re in the air and you have no choice but to land back onto the ground. They clearly state that landing with either foot makes it illegal. It isn’t a jump if you lift the pivot foot and the other foot is still on the ground. So basically, the up and under move is LEGAL as long as you shoot or pass, just as this video explains. Pretty simple, but I think you may be confused by the word “jump”.
I think lifting the pivot is fine to shoot, but taking another step after lifting is what everyone thinks is wrong, because it’s a step vs a shot attempt, that’s why people say you gotta lift both feet. The wording of the rule books don’t explicitly say you can’t put another foot down, so I guess it’s legal. I just wouldn’t do it to take a step towards the basket to shoot. Once you lift your pivot, you have to be in form, both feet lifted not taking a step to a layup. That’s what I learned and that’s what I personally think is fair, otherwise you’re taking a 3rd step which is a travel in my book. Kobe always pivot and faded off both feet at once. He’s the benchmark
Wording in NBA, NCAA and high school in USA allows to leave pivot foot, so if you extend your non pivot foot and leave your pivot foot, it is allowed
Most if not all of the videos you showed were players jumping off 2 feet. My only confusion is although you’re saying the rule books state your pivot can be lifted to pass or shoot...it doesn’t say you can change your pivot in the process. Using Melo example he is basically switching his pivot to get a better shot. I’m sure under the same section on traveling on all levels it says “you can’t switch pivots” that’s why in most of the videos (aside from Tony and I think Kobe) the players jumped off 2 feet and didn’t switch pivots. I seen it called a travel and I’ve seen it not called.
Hey Josh! Thanks for watching the whole video and providing good feedback. Some other people have mentioned the same concern on the examples portion (in two of them you have to go super slow motion to see that they actually jump off one foot but real time it is hard to notice) so I made an additional video of the step through being done at various levels with clear cut jumping off the non pivot foot. You can find that here: th-cam.com/video/vCbAtpVNxjw/w-d-xo.html
Also has two NBA officials commenting on it :)
As for referees being inconsistent, that seems to be a USA problem. Not to target a country or rule set but step throughs are common practice around the world and have barely any discussions on it being a travel. Maybe it is in the education or training of referees, I do not know. I just know that USA tends to have that argument plenty of times.
As for the switching pivot foots comment. It is important to understand that the pivot foot was not switched. If it was, Melo would have pivoted with the non-pivot foot (spinning on an axel of the balls of your foot or placing the original pivot foot back down to pivot). Melo is stepping off the pivot foot to go score. The rule states this clearly in the video that a player may lift their pivot foot (which Melo does) but it cannot return until a release for a pass or shot is made. He did exactly that. The pivot foot was lifted and never came back down until he released the ball on his shot.
Thank you for the participation!
Josh, I agree. The rule book says if you pick up your foot the other foot becomes your pivot foot. Just because you don’t pivot on it doesn’t mean it’s not your pivot foot. So you’re basically switching pivot feet when you pick up your pivot foot and go to the other foot. Switching pivot feet is a travel.
The video is right about if Melo goes off 2 feet he covers less ground. If you can just step through and switch pivot feet Melo can gain at least another 3 feet which is going to make him basically unguardable.
@@jmohl6831 Depends on the rule book. Some do not state that but for one that does (FIBA), I think your issue comes with how to read the rule book or how English language works. In one bullet point, which is the one you reference, talks about landing on two feet and whatever foot you lift, the other becomes the pivot foot. What this means: If you land on two, you have the option of having either foot as your pivot foot. It becomes selected when one foot is lifted. Then the following bullet point talks about dribbling after a pivot foot was determined. Then the third bullet point talks about scenarios with a pivot foot in shooting and passing actions. These bullet points all work together and they do not conflict each other.
In order to "switch" pivot foots, then your original pivot foot would have to come back down before shooting or passing the ball which THEN would result in switching of the pivot foot. You are entitled to that step whether it is a layup or a step through. Also you can find other players doing this and NBA referees confirming this is legal here:th-cam.com/video/vCbAtpVNxjw/w-d-xo.html
Thanks for stopping by!
Referee you may be correct about this but here lies the issue. Unless you’re able to put together a major marketing campaign to really get this out there referees and coaches are still going to interpret this rule how they see fit. I played a lot of basketball growing up on different levels and was taught by every coach that this very move was illegal once you picked up your back foot and went solely to the front one. I’ve been called for traveling by referees that believed I lifted my back foot instead of jumping off both simultaneously. I truly believe you may be right but I wouldn’t be comfortable using those moves in a game because of the ambiguity of the interpretation. That is easy to see from your videos. When you have multiple hall of fame nba players and high level trainers saying it’s a travel, even if it’s not, there’s definitely a chance the call is going to go against you when the game is on the line.
@@jmohl6831 You are right. From what I gather it is due to development and learning through personal experience. Official development differs in places and the interpreter or head referee should release a statement saying this move is legal. Heck, they can just show my video to referees and that was the goal of this channel: To bring awareness and clarity with the rules by having the actual rule shown and a visual to demonstrate. Second issues is personal experience. I am guilty of this as well. Majority of referees are going by personal experience on what was called when they coached, played or when the reffed with a partner who called it a violation. There are few referees that actually read the rule book front to back and implement the rule. I have done the same earlier in my reffing career and made calls on what was deemed illegal when I played pro. For the most part, this tends to be a great debate/issue in the United States compared to other places. I am sure there are other rules other places struggle with but it might have to do with the varying rules at all levels in the states and other places tend to go full FIBA. Sorry for the long reply but you are correct and I wanted to present what I think it may be!
You are completely and totally wrong. You point out all these rules which really have to do with the definitions of "up and down" meaning once you jump off your pivot foot, you have to get rid of the ball before landing. What you completely miss is the definition of a PIVOT FOOT
Section VIII-Pivot
a. A pivot takes place when a player, who is holding the ball, steps once or more
than once in any direction with the same foot, with the other foot (pivot foot) in contact with
the floor.
Key phrase is "WITH THE SAME FOOT". You can't pivot off of one foot, and then lift that foot and pivot off the other foot. If you could, then why couldn't you do it a third and fourth time and walk all the way down the court. You get ONE pivot foot to......pivot off of. That's why it's called a PIVOT foot.
Just think about it....could you pivot off your left foot with a pump fake, and then pivot off your right foot with another pump fake? No, because you get ONE pivot foot, not infinite. What Carmelo is doing is pivoting off his left, stepping onto his right and LIFTING HIS PIVOT foot. You can't do that, it's a travel!
Thank you
You can't physically pivot when one foot is off the ground..... Lastly, can't do most layups or fadeaways if you were not allowed to step on the non-pivot foot
So according to fiba rules, if your pivot foot is 1, you can move your 2 with your 1 remaining on the floor. If you decide to raise your 1, neither foot can touch the fpground before the ball leaves your hand. So the WNBA move is illegal for fiba.
Great question. I had the same thought process so I brought that up to a credible FIBA source and they said "Key to a legal step through - is that the player steps off the non-pivot foot - he does not jump off the pivot foot.". So the step through is allowed if you step off it not jump off of it.
@@refereeuniversity This is the point that comes up more often then the "simple" step through where you lift your pivot but never have both feet in the air. I understand your explanation and would tend to agree. What I am confused about is whether this is somehow different when catching the ball stationary versus progressing (after dribble). The FIBA rules seem to indicate that to me as they talk about jumping with both feet in the progression section. I am imagining a basic jumpshot vs a side hop of the pivot foot. Any idea??
@@roc9290 Progression category allows for a zero step. So if you end the dribble with one foot on the ground, you can A) Jump off of it and land on two feet (allowing either pivot foot to be used) or you can B) take another step then jump off of it and land on two feet (where you cannot pivot). The progression just allows for the use of the zero/gather step. Hope that helps?
@@refereeuniversity I don't agree with this interpretation, but regardless every clip I have seen shows the offensive player jumping off of the non-pivot foot before releasing the ball. The rule cited does not mention jumping off of the non pivot foot. Once you are in the world of pivoting you are no longer in the world of 2 steps "upon completion of a dribble" ("upon" means immediately after to me rather than "at any time subsequent to completion of a dribble including even after establishing a pivot foot and pivoting, etc."
@@therationalpiper7428you and everyone else with this interpretation is completely misunderstanding the verbiage. You are never out of the realm of 2 steps to shoot or pass. Being allowed 2 steps to stop does not mean that coming to a stop changes anything with what you can do with your pivot. The wording after that is just qualifying how to identify which foot is the pivot. If a player comes to a stop or receives the ball while standing still and has an established pivot foot, he can take as many steps as he wants with the other foot. If the left foot is the pivot, 5 consecutive steps could be taken with the right foot. As long as that left (pivot) stays down, every additional step with the right is the 2nd step. There is no 3rd step unless the pivot is raised and returned to the floor.
lol i swear i argue this whole my life with people. I had a huge debate comments section under that Kevin Garnet clip and even some refs at the end had to admit i'm right . Good job keep educating ppl
Thank you!
Good analysis if Section XIII.d. is read in isolation. But it seems like there is difference. How many steps are taken and where is the jump started? KG and those NBA highlights jump off two, while Parker and some of the Melo layups show them jumping off the extra step.
Yes, but that is why it is listed in a bullet point. It is to be isolated because it is a different scenario/action. It is to be read in isolation for if and when that situation occurs.
The key here is the difference/understanding of an extra step. KG and others jump off two, here is an additional list of those jumping off of one: th-cam.com/video/vCbAtpVNxjw/w-d-xo.html
It is not an extra step because you are allowed it in a pivot situation. Think of layups, you are stepping off your pivot foot when you complete one :)
@@refereeuniversity ..."... It is to be read in isolation..."... No, you (and obviously many high-level referees) have chosen to read it in isolation, when instead it should be read in conjunction with the principles defined in prior definitions and rules..... you and others have made the rule and interpretation inconsistent because you have chosen to read it in isolation!
There are two fundamental principles involved - 1) that you are allowed to "pivot" but not allowed to lift a pivot foot, and - 2) a concession is made for players already in motion to lift the pivot foot as they release the ball.
You have taken a rule that was written specifically to elaborate on a concession allowed to fit the second principle (for players in motion), and applied it to override and contradict the first principle (for players who are stationary or come to a stop).
I do not understand how you (and other high level referees) do not see and acknowledge how you have created and perpetuated this ambiguity and contradiction in the rules!
@@troylipsham4365 That is not true though. In the NBA section XIII of traveling, situation c & d have completely different allowances on the pivot foot. One allows lifting of the pivot if you shoot or pass after. One says if you dribble after lifting the pivot foot, it is a travel. They can be read in both isolation and in collaboration with each other. C actually states when both motion and stationary situations come together in collaboration of a rule.
I can understand your confusion but if that is what the official interpretation is and how it's written, then how can we argue it? A lot of referees understand it and think it's clear enough. At the end of the day, if the person who writes and makes the rules say it is legal and the referees ref the game with that understanding then who really does not understand it?
@@refereeuniversity wrote: "...I can understand your confusion ... if that is what the official interpretation is and how it's written, then how can we argue...
...if the person who writes and makes the rules say it is legal...who really does not understand it? "
I am not confused ... I understand that there are 'official' interpretations that condone this ... I understand that these 'official interpretations' disregard or contradict certain fundamental written rules... I understand how it is derived from reading certain rules in isolation... I understand that it creates a contradiction and ambiguity in the rules... I understand that you think the FIBA rules are inconsistent because they use the word "jump" instead of "raise" and this doesn't match your isolated interpretation of these rule... I understand how these rules and interpretations and style of play have evolved historically together.
I understand how the rules alone don't dictate the game, and that some ambiguous rules have been abused into various styles of play and 'officials' have tried to interpret their written rules to match the play and to try and develop international consistency.... I understand that there is not any one person who writes and makes these rules and has the final say on interpretation (as you mistakenly suggest)... I understand that these interpretations are drawn from several conflicting sources and negotiated amongst several parties, and that when consensus cannot be reached the rule is left ambiguous or unresolved to allow separate interpretations.
I understand a lot of high-level players, coaches and referees do think these rules are unclear and there is considerable confusion and inconsistency.... you just have to look at the source of your original post! And you just have to look at the reality of Zac's comment which you rubbished... he actually sums it up perfectly - it depends entirely on the referee as to whether you get called for a violation or not.... I understand this, but I'd like to think that the written rules will provide a clear, unambiguous guide as to how the referee will interpret it.
But I now also understand that you are not interested in acknowledging or discussing the inconsistencies in the written rules and interpretation and using your apparent influence to remedy these inconsistencies.... I can see that you are merely interested in reinforcing the official (mis)interpretations despite the ambiguities and inconsistencies created... you make it clear that 'official' interpretations (whether or not consistent with the written rules) is all that matters, and that they override certain written rules.
I commend you on your channel - you provide a lot of well organised clarifications and examples which are very useful for those who struggle to read or understand the rulebook and some good topics for discussion. I enjoyed our exchange of messages and would have liked to debate a few more topics, but there is little point if neither of us is in a position to influence 'officials' to tidy up the ambiguities.
@@troylipsham4365 there is actually no inconsistency. The travelling rules are actually applied different pre dribble and post dribble, and that's very clear.
I will tell you what create an inconsistency though.
Insisting that this move is a travel. Why? Because if this move is a travel, then we can never perform a 1-2 layup without travelling (unless we are doing a same foot-same hand layup). Because we are all jumping off our pivot foot while our other foot is on the ground.
According to fiba it says travel. Notice they say NEITHER FOOT MAY BE RETURNED TO THE FLOOR, meaning, you cant step to the non-pivot foot once the pivot foot is lifted.
FIBA's wording should be better, I agree but still allowed due to the meaning. They mean jump not step, making it legal
In all the “non-call” nba examples (KG, tmac, Kobe), they’re going off two feet for a leaning jumper. Candace established a new pivot foot when the old pivot lifts. That’s a travel 75% of the time unless it’s a very small “extra” step for a layup
Slow down the video and the only guy who jumps off of two is KG. Due to them being not clear cut enough, I made a whole reel showing it occurring with no whistle and top NBA officials supporting my content. th-cam.com/video/vCbAtpVNxjw/w-d-xo.html&ab_channel=RefereeUniversity
Do you understand what “establishing new pivot” mean? Because you dont 😂
why does the length of the step matter? you can pick up your pivot foot on a step thru but you have to get rid of the ball before you put it back down.
những pha này ko bước nhé ông, nhấc trụ lên được nhưng bóng phải rời tay trước khi chân trụ đó chạm đất
@@refereeuniversity dude no...the reason Kobe and others in this video did it the way they did is because they were taught it's a travel to lift that foot.
The fact there may be a micro second where the foot is lifted that you might be able to see by slowing down the video is irrelevant lol
I agree with your interpretation for the NBA and NCAA - under these rules, the step-through is legal. But the FIBA rule states that "the player may jump off a pivot foot, but NEITHER foot may be returned to the court before the ball is released from the hand(s)." Since NEITHER foot can touch the floor once the pivot foot is released, the step-through would be considered a travel under FIBA rules.
I agree, the rule can be written better, I was told the interpretation of a step and a jump are different in FIBA which makes it legal
Thanks for posting this. I think they interpret it like this now but as mentioned in previous comments, in the past, you lift that pivot foot, refs would call it because you are shifting your pivot/leverage to your other foot. But you're right, we have to accept it now just like the control/ gather step. I always watch when im at a new court. If they do it, i do it.
th-cam.com/video/C3w5U7vC0w4/w-d-xo.html
In basketball lifting your pivot foot has ALWAYS been allowed so long as you shoot or pass before it comes down. The Up & Under is as nearly as old as the game itself. The link contains 500 examples of all eras of the nba. you're welcome
that "zac" guy says the right thing but draws the wrong conclusions... "you can pick up your pivot foot to pass or shot. you can't put it back down". well picking it up to shoot is exactly what he did in the first place so why in the world do you call it a travel???
I got called for this twice today. after the game I explained to the ref how it wasn’t a travel and he finally agreed with me
It’s just crazy to me that these bums are tryna tell CARMELO ANTHONY about basketball. You think melo been dominating at every level and don’t know what a travel is and isn’t?
Well, he never dominated shitt, Kyrie thinks the earth is flat and taking an extra step after lifting your pivot foot is a travel. If you read the rules, it is literally just there.
If it was a travel that you wouldn't be able to do a layup. In a layup, the first foot is the pivot foot the second foot you jump off of and the first foot comes off the floor when performing a layup. Not a travel.
This probably the best, most concise argument to rebut all those who wrongly think this move is a travel!
@@daviddemola6393
David here are some links below showing it is legal as well.
I've looked into this a little more and in the NBA rule book it is clear that it is not a travel.
official.nba.com/rule-no-10-violations-and-penalties/
"If a player, with the ball in his possession, raises his pivot foot off the floor, he must pass or shoot before his pivot foot returns to the floor. If he drops the ball while in the air, he may not be the first to touch the ball."
The same is true for the NCAA language.
www.ncaapublications.com/p-4586-2019-20-ncaa-mens-basketball-rules-and-interpretations.aspx
"Art. 5. After coming to a stop and establishing the pivot foot: The pivot foot may be lifted, but not returned to the playing court, before the ball is released on a pass or try for goal; The pivot foot shall not be lifted before the ball is released to start a dribble"
For high school NFHS rules it is also legal check out the following video. 30 minutes into the video. It was a 2018 point of emphasis for their refs.
th-cam.com/video/3-c2cicAd8M/w-d-xo.html&feature=emb_logo
How are you interpreting FIBA as legal when the rule states:
“Neither foot can return to the floor before the ball is released”
When you lift your pivot foot your step through foot makes contact long before the shot gets up. The only literal interpretation for this sentence would be jumping off the pivot and both feet being in the air right?
Step through have two kinds: 1. up and under---legal , 2 Chinese soma---illegal, this video is just like Chinese soma---illegal.
That is a great question, the issue is wording could be changed to be more literal. My interpretation matches the FIBA rules Interpreter, that a step is not the same as a jump. The rule you are referencing talks about jumping off your pivot, not stepping off. Yes, poor wording but that is exactly how they interpret the rule on the matter. So, a step through, not a jump through, is legal.
Let's just end the debate here
"The pivot foot is important because: A player must start dribbling the ball before lifting their pivot foot; A player may lift their pivot foot as long as they pass or shoot prior to the foot being put back on the ground" Rule 2.1.8 WABC.
If the pivot foot is lifted, you can shift to the other foot and balance, lean, do whatever as long as you don't put your lifted pivot foot back down.
step tru is ok hop tru is travel/jump. melo hopped when both feet are on the air then landed on his non pivot before the layup in the 1st example but he did it very subtle so usually no call.
Bro literally all the nba clips you showed were them jumping off two.
No shit they can’t take another step it’s a travel they have to jump with both feet
If you slow it down (Option on the cog wheel bottom right) you will see they are off of one. Since it was not clear enough, here are plenty more th-cam.com/video/vCbAtpVNxjw/w-d-xo.html&ab_channel=RefereeUniversity
If you slow it down (Option on the cog wheel bottom right) you will see they are off of one. Since it was not clear enough, here are plenty more th-cam.com/video/vCbAtpVNxjw/w-d-xo.html&ab_channel=RefereeUniversity
That is a TRAVEL!
Let's consult NBA officials then th-cam.com/video/vCbAtpVNxjw/w-d-xo.html&ab_channel=RefereeUniversity
@@refereeuniversity .. It's a Travel!! How u gonna be able to lift ur pivot unless ur shooting or passing.. U HAVE TO JUMP OFF BOTH FEET
@@javee-th5no That's how you do a layup
If it was a travel then every layup is a travel. It’s the same amount of steps.
The first foot planted on the ground after gathering for a layup is considered your “pivot” and you can lift it without jumping off of both feet.
Absolutely untrue. They are both completelyyyyy different.
A layup is taking two steps after gathering the ball.
A step through could be gathering the ball, taking those two steps to a stop, establishing a pivot foot, pivoting around while using that pivot foot, and then lifting the pivot foot and taking anotherrrrr step.
Completely different.
NBA and NCAA is clear that you can lift the pivot foot. FIBA says "May jump off the pivot foot", that clear and directly says that "you can not lift your pivot foot, and step on your not-pivot foot".....Not NBA-NCAA and FIBA say the same as you say
Lifting pivot foot would mean being on your non pivot foot.
FIBA's wording should be better, they mean you can step not jump off your pivot
I am from Greece and for decades now we were told by coaches etv that you can not lift your pivot foot and step on the other. You could either jump with both feet at the same time or spin around your pivot foot. The wording on FIBA clearly describes this, if something has changed FIBA neeed to update the wording.
By fiba rules, you may release your pivot foot in order to make a shot or pass as long as it doesn't return to the floor before the ball is released.
I just learned that you can take as many steps as you can squeeze between dribbles. ILoveBasketball Coach Ryan Razooky
No one jumps with both feet when they're laying up. One foot always comes up before the other on a layup. It's only travel when you put it back down before releasing the ball.
they do watchu mean?
You can pick up your pivot king as you going for a shot or pass and don’t put it back down
Sup TJass gang
Dude at the park kept telling me I was traveling tonight I'm like dude I've been doing this move since I was a kid when you start playing hoops crazy man people don't even know how to ball properly lol
so does that technically mean you can straight up just be chillin on one foot for how ever long you want after you raise your pivot?
Yes, by rule, you could do that.
Referee University lmao no way!!!
@@danieldx2 Yes way!
😂😂 dude they should change this rule
@@ajdivuhducia1576 If you did, you cannot do layups. The rule is fine
I just learend this this year I wish I knew this when I was younger but it is a legit move
Hi! I am with you when it comes to the NBA and NCAA rules. However, I think the FIBA rules are different by stating that "the player may jump off a pivot foot". When performing the movement shown by Candace Parker, you are not "jumping off the pivot foot" but you are jumping off the other foot (after taking another step), aren't you? So In my opinion according to the FIBA rules it could be considered a travel...
Great question, the big issue would be defining the difference between a jump and a step. In some of our recent videos, people were asking about some legal moves with the freedom of a step and I think FIBA should clean up their travel rule description.
Referee University I think the difference between a jump and a step is that it’s impossible to jump when your other foot is still touching the ground, otherwise it’s a step. So taking the FIBA statement literally, it would be a travel since the playing is not jumping off the pivot foot and instead stepping, which allows the other foot to jump.
@@timctam @Referee University has is exactly right re the unhelpful wording of the rule. That being said let me analyze it like a lawyer would: 1) start with the statement of the rule principle, namely "A player who catches the ball while he is progressing, or upon completion of a dribble, may take two steps in coming to a stop, passing or shooting the ball:" 2) Look at the exceptions and qualifications to this principle: there are 8 of these! The relevant one is "If the player who comes to a stop on his first step has both feet on the floor or they touch the floor simultaneously, he may pivot using either foot as his pivot foot. If he then jumps with both feet, no foot may return to the floor before the ball is released from the hand(s)." Notice it is describing the special situation of a pivot mid-layup. In this special situation, the only thing it says you cannot do is jump with both feet and return either foot to the ground. This is not the same as saying you must jump with two feet or it's a travel? Do you see the difference?
@@daviddemola6393 I love having these debates especially with people who love bball :). Just want to make sure we're talking about the same thing. 1. I'm not talking about jumping off two feet at the same time, no one is. 2. Agreed that the NBA/WNBA/NCAA call this a non-travel.3. We're talking about the FIBA rule which states at 6:37. "To pass or shoot for a field goal, the player may jump off a pivot foot, but neither foot may be returned to the floor before the ball is released from the hand(s)." The step through that Carmelo does is in violation of this rule and therefore is a travel. The FIBA rule should be changed.
Why is it a travel given this wording? Because the player has established a pivot foot, but instead of JUMPING, he takes a STEP with the other foot. This is in violation of two things. 1. He didnt jump. 2. the other foot is on the floor before the ball is released.
Lets take a look at Melo example.
2:31 - Melo establishes left foot as pivot foot.
2:32 - Melo steps through with right foot. The pivot is lifted.
2:32 - (end of that second) Melo jumps off right foot to lay up the ball.
So, its established that Melo does not jump off pivot foot. Melo's does jump off non-pivot foot, after pivot is lifted.
Its not a travel in NBA/WNBA/NCAA. It is a travel in FIBA. :) happy to nerd it out.
@@timctam Sure I love a good discussion too :) so let me articulate where I think you're going astray. (I accept all facts below "Melo example") : there are actually two sections in Art 25.2.1 first bullet 3rd bar and 25.2.1 second bullet 4th bar. The one you quote and in the video is not the one directly relevant to CA's move, or so I'm arguing, as he's progressing, not catching the ball with two feet on the floor (the opening clause for each bullet is crucial!). Let's say we agree that we're not talking about jumping off two feet then. I could say well fine, you've agreed the video is not one the cases the relevant section of rule says is a travel, so it must be legal. Further relevant rules notwithstanding end of story. But to engage with your point a little further, let's look at the first bullet, for the stationary player case. Although not written in conditional form " *If* A happens *then* violation V applies" this is how it should be interpreted due to the word "may". That is: "If a player jumps off a pivot foot then it is a violation to return either foot to the floor". So again I'm going to say, there is a difference between saying (among all the things a player can do) "a player *is allowed to* jump off pivot foot with some restrictions" and what you're saying implicitly: "a player *must* jump off the pivot foot or it's a travel". Long story short there's no rule saying you *have* to jump off the pivot foot, merely there are restrictions when you do. If you don't jump off pivot foot, you are only constrained by step count.
So for example on the paragraph at 7:24,
they clearly just say that the pivot foot can’t return to the court, but wouldn’t it be a travel anyway since the other foot just took a step?
Like you lifted the pivot foot, have no steps left (because after picking up your dribble you and pivoting you can’t just take steps anymore) and then your basically doing another step?
This is how I always understood it, I’m genuinely curious as to why this would be wrong
In another video they say that you are allowed an additional step to pass or shoot, is this true? What rule specifically states this?
It's not another step, you can lift your pivot foot (So step onto the foot your allowed: second step) to pass or shoot. You cannot do that when starting a dribble.
FIBA rules that are written can be more clear instead of relying a lot on interpretations of the rule. They should change it to NBA rule outline
It’s ok, even Gilbert Arenas and Kevin Garnett don’t understand these rules. It’s sad
Everyone is missing the point that this shit was called differently in their time. It's not that they don't know the rules. Jordan and Kobe obviously thought the same thing, because they made a point to jump off both feet after pivoting.
The FIBA rules says "Neither foot", Carmelo simply lifts the pivot foot and steps again ( extra step ).. it's a travel.. how is this so hard to get, if you read the initial paragraph it says you are allowed two steps..
Neither foot can return to the ground when you jump. A step is not a jump. That is referring to the FIBA rules, other ones are clearly showcasing legality.
@@refereeuniversity you cannot take an additional step after your pivot foot leaves the ground
in all those compilations notice how they’re all jumping off BOTH feet
HoopMix I appreciate you coming and checking out the channel. Hopefully you watched the whole video so you have the explanation of the rules and I made a secondary video to clear up this worry of yours th-cam.com/video/vCbAtpVNxjw/w-d-xo.html
We really need more content on this very issue. Too many people are starting to believe the Candace Parker move to be 'legal' -____-
It is legal though? please watch whole video and if you require more clear cut examples, click the link
I don't know about NBA rules but in FIBA it's not legal unless you jump off the pivot foot. So in effect from both feet. Otherwise its a step. And its a traveling violation. Because its a move of both feet beyond the limits in traveling article.
In the clips they aren’t hopping off both feet. There all doing the same thing, melo’s just is more pronounced because he drives his knee up. ... except kg, he did really go off two.
U can even try it, if they go off two there wouldn’t be all that ground covered, just like he says in the video. The second most pronounced is the Kobe clip, he can’t cover that ground simply off two.
This video confused me more. Because when you were comparing Melo's moves and said they were the same, they are actually different. In the first clip he lift his pivot foot while his other is on the ground. In the second, he jumps off both. Also, every clip of NBA players shows they jump off both, which is not a travel. However, Candace Parker's and Melo's first move was a travel
You are right. Step through includes "up and under" and soma step. They can't tell the difference between "up and under" steps and soma steps.
It is very hard to lean forward and jump off of two feet, if you slow it down, two of those moves are off of one. What is confusing, is that people find this to be a travel, but do not realize, that most layups that occur, you step off of your pivot foot and shot with the non-pivot foot
completely wrong 🤣. kg and kobe jumped off two feet clearly. you have to jump off two feet. you have to jump off pivot foot as well as other foot 🤦♂️. not just your other foot like mello. the trainer clearly says you gotta jump off two its simple logic. once your pivot foot is down you can raise it up as in JUMP OFF IT to shoot or pass. think logically of this rule 6:14. so your saying you can establish your pivot foot then raise it in the air stand there like a flamingo on one foot forever then pass or shoot before it returns to the floor no. the next line says if he drops the ball while in the air because thats after you jumped off your pivot foot.
Here is 7 minutes of game film of it occurring in the NBA and NCAA. In addition, a former NBA official and the VP of official development state that it is not a travel: th-cam.com/video/vCbAtpVNxjw/w-d-xo.html.
dude dude Simple logic huh? Did you happen to check out that other video? Anything to say now that he proved you wrong? Or maybe you think Ronnie Nunn and Joe Borgia don't know what they're talking about either? Don't feel too bad, I was just as certain as you... until I realized I was wrong 🤦♂️
I don’t think it’s a travel given what the refs have said. That being said, any time a step through is used is on a layup. I would love to see this done at the top of the key to see if it’s called as a travel or not.
@@timctam here you go - extreme example: instagram.com/p/CB4AMBjBcV0/?
and a more modest one: instagram.com/p/CBY25RknAHK/?
You're welcome ;)
Mark L.earns 👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼
The difference in nba examples, the players didn't move their knees forward to make it seen so apparent.
Jumping off two versus jumping off one after switching feet. It’s called a travel in men’s college but not overseas. My teammates from other countries hated that they called it.
You're right and hopefully it changes because the rules support it and the top referees/referee coaches have confirmed it's legal
@@refereeuniversity it's not a travel, it shouldn't be a travel, and there are many "legal travels" within the game to ensure flow... But this is a slower move that exposes the ball to the defender. The last point is all I care about and why I teach my players not to do it... along with the potential of a ref who doesn't know better calling it a travel. No need to die on this hill when the move isn't necessarily better.
@@stepthroughjoe8815 I think it should be legal per rule... but it's called a travel at lot, can't possibly be scene as legal on other parts of the court, and opens the offensive player up to an increased chance of being blocked. On most every layup, we get to reestablish our pivot twice... and the game is better for it.
When u lift ur pivot foot and take that EXTRA STEP u get away from the defender with more distance compared to jumping with both feet! U have to play basketball to know this!! If u dont play u dont know..
NBA, FIBA officials say it's legal, sooooo I think you need more than playing basketball to understand
@refereeuniversity ..Ummmm nahhh.. it ain't LEGAL.. IT CLEARLY SAYS ON THE RULE BOOK U CAN ONLY LIFT YR PIVOT TO SHOOT OR PASS, NOT TO TAKE AN EXTRA STEP FOR A LAYUP..
@@javee-th5no When you lift your pivot foot ONLY you have one foot in contact with the floor. You were so close
HIS FIRST TWO HIGHLIGHTS OF KOBE AND TONY PARKER…show them jumping off two at the same time. I knew I wasn’t trippin. Taking a complete step is a damn travel.
Slow down footage, one foot. More clear cut examples: th-cam.com/video/vCbAtpVNxjw/w-d-xo.html&ab_channel=RefereeUniversity
I’m glad you showed the rules to prove it is legal but in the 3 nba examples you showed they jumped with their pivots still on the floor, bad examples.
You are completely right. I put a compilation together for better clips: th-cam.com/video/vCbAtpVNxjw/w-d-xo.html&ab_channel=RefereeUniversity
IN SHORT, it is not a travel, it’s a travel if the pivot foot went up AND came down
Even in the international rule you read, it clearly states that neither foot can touch the ground after your pivot foot leaves the floor, which is why the step through is a travel, because you are returning another foot to the ground after jumping off your pivot foot.
Stepping and jumping are the same thing…hence the triple jump that is two steps before a jump.
What I'm understanding is that during a step through, there is always a foot in contact with the ground. You are not lifting the pivot then placing the other foot on the ground. The other foot is already in contact with the ground before the pivot foot is lifted. If the pivot foot is lifted first (jumping, not stepping through), this would be a travel.
Here is a bunch of clear cut ones: th-cam.com/video/vCbAtpVNxjw/w-d-xo.html&ab_channel=RefereeUniversity . Read the pivot definition then read what is required to leave your pivot foot. That will give you the answer to why it is not a travel.
All one foot layups require stepping off a pivot foot FYI
The reason why people get this rule wrong is because they DON'T See what is the established pivot foot.....
Awesome explanation thanks
The examples in the nba and wnba literally didn't help you prove your point
You are 100% right. No call doesn't mean legal.
Yes, two examples need to be slowed down for it. I made a follow up of clear cut ones th-cam.com/video/vCbAtpVNxjw/w-d-xo.html&ab_channel=RefereeUniversity
RJ, so as per your interpretation in NBA you can continue hopping with your non pivot foot as long as you dont put your pivot foot down? . FIBA rules are clear you need to jump with your pivot foot and in these videos most players lift their pivot and jump with non pivot (and both legs not in the air when pivot lifted) These are travel and consistently also called travel in every fiba game
There is another rule that says you cannot hop on the same foot consecutively, which renders that interpretation incorrect.
What Carmelo did is not travel. It just looks weird step because his right foot took a step while his pivot was off the ground. If you clearly see what Kobe did was he took his pivot and other foot off the ground at the same time.
6:12 are we really gonna be blind to this? lol it clearly states that you may “JUMP OFF A PIVOT FOOT”. Clear distinction from the NBA. You cant step through in euro basketball by the FIBA rules. You may JUMP OF THE PIVOT (so either jump only of that foot or of the both feet simultaneously).
Jump is not a step, FIBA is big into words and they separate the two.
@@wyattanders8548 and thats why you cant do step through like in the NBA.
You can, FIBA rule people have confirmed this
@@refereeuniversity Find me the evidence of that. The rule book is clear, you may "jump of a pivot foot" that is a clear distinction from the step through. Plus there is no footage from the euroleague where players do this on game2game basis. I am watching euroleague every week, and this is called a travel every single time (unless they missed it of course) .
@@refereeuniversitycan you respond to this where this is confirmed since I was wondering the same thing. Since with the step through you're not jumping off your pivot foot.
The issue here is about whether you can individually pick up the pivot foot. All the NBA clips you showed were of players jumping off with both feet, something both sides of the debate agree is legal. The question is, can you individually pick up the pivot foot to jump further ahead which intuitively seems like a travel to me.
Stepping off your pivot foot is not an additional step. That is how you do layups and floaters, that is how you do fadeaways. Not an additional step.
2 clips they jumped off of one but you have to slow it down. Here are many examples where it is not called. I think the sample size of called travels are very little. th-cam.com/video/vCbAtpVNxjw/w-d-xo.html&ab_channel=RefereeUniversity
The compelling factor is how you establish the pivot, no? Crab dribble or jump stop into a step through - legal. Two steps into a step through, illegal, on account of player SWITCHING their pivot foot, and therefore constituting a 3 step motion. Can you talk about how you get to the pivot foot? I get that you can raise it...
Pivot foot is first step after gathering the ball
Bro that’s a travel he picked up pivot when still on ground, I don’t understand what’s so hard about that
Then all fadeaways and layups would be travels..
th-cam.com/video/vCbAtpVNxjw/w-d-xo.html&ab_channel=RefereeUniversity
The examples u have show that they are JUMPING OFF BOTH FEET, they aren't jumping how Carmelo jumped!
Slow it down, bottom right wheel. Very difficult to do a forward step through with two feet. Body mechanics disagree
@refereeuniversity .. That's just the way it is but u can't take that extra step.. Atleast make it close to jump off both feet
It’s not an extra step
I always thought once you stop and you move your pivot foot, it's a travel. To me it's like cheating cause that extra step makes a huge difference
You can always lift the pivot foot to pass and shoot, just cannot lift it to start a dribble
I’m pleased you posted this clip, but I respectfully have to agree with AB and KG and disagree with you… and it’s disappointing that this issue remains unresolved and refereed inconsistently.
You make the most salient point that defeats your own argument at 4:40 in the video, and this is the point disregarded even though it is explicit in several version of the Rules (and implicit in others).
You note that … “by lifting the pivot foot the player is able to progress or travel further than if they are forced to jump off the pivot foot or both feet together”…
The key point is that they progress or travel in lifting the pivot foot!
And in each of your interpretations of the written Rules, you (and many referees including some at the highest levels) have disregarded referring to the fundamental Rule in this circumstance.
*In NBA Rules:
Rule No.4 - Definitions
“Section VIII-Pivot
a. A pivot takes place when a player, who is holding the ball, steps once or more
than once in any direction with the same foot, with the other foot (pivot foot) in contact with
the floor.
b. If the player wishes to dribble after a pivot, the ball must be out of his hand before
the pivot foot is raised off the floor. If the player raises his pivot off the floor, he must pass or
attempt a field goal before the foot is returned to the floor.
If he fails to follow these guidelines, he has committed a traveling violation.
“Section IX-Traveling
Traveling is progressing in any direction while in possession of the ball, which is in
excess of prescribed limits as noted in Rule 4-Section VIII and Rule 10-Section XIII.”
*In FIBA Rules:
“25.1. Definition
25.1.1. Travelling is the illegal movement of one foot or both feet beyond the limits outlined in this article, in any direction, while holding a live ball on the playing court.
25.1.2. A pivot is the legal movement in which a player who is holding a live ball on the playing court steps once or more than once in any direction with the same foot, while the other foot, called the pivot foot, is kept at its point of contact with the floor.
25.2.1. Establishing a pivot foot by a player who catches a live ball on the playing court:
• A player who catches the ball while standing with both feet on the floor:
……
- To pass or shoot for a field goal, the player may jump off a pivot foot, but neither foot may be returned to the floor before the ball is released from the hand(s).”
*In NCAA Rules:
“Rule No.4 - Definitions
Section 27. Pivot
A pivot takes place when a player who is holding the ball steps once or more than once in any direction with the same foot, while the other foot, called the pivot foot, is kept at its point of contact with the playing court.”
…and …
“Rule 9 - Violations
Section 5. Traveling
Art. 1. A player shall not travel with the ball.
Art. 2. Traveling occurs when a player holding the ball moves a foot or both feet in any direction in excess of prescribed limits described in this section.
Art. 3. A player who catches the ball with both feet on the playing court may pivot, using either foot. When one foot is lifted, the other is the pivot foot”.
You need to find a way to interpret the selected extracts of the Rules which you quote, without conflicting with the other limits prescribed by the Rules.
You must try to interpret the extracts you quote - ‘that a player may lift or jump off the pivot foot, but must release the ball before they land again’ - making it consistent with the following:
-without taking the special allowances for receiving or gathering the ball as a moving player
-without lifting the pivot foot to progress or travel in any direction (except jumping)
*In your reference to the NBA Rule, you conveniently disregard the limits that are prescribed in the Rule 4 Definitions - Sections “VIII - Pivot” and “IX - Travelling”
*In your reference to the FIBA Rule, you conveniently disregard the allowance in Rule 25.2.1 is only if the player “jumps off the pivot foot”.
*In your reference to the NCAA Rule, you conveniently disregard the Rule 4 definition of “Pivot” definition and Arts. 1,2 &3 of the Travelling violation, and you quote Art 5 only which relates to a different situation.
Art.5 follows Art 4 which refers to a player who catches (or gathers) the ball while moving, and Art 5 expands on that situation for that player “after coming to a stop”… Art 5 does not relate in any way to a player who catches the ball while stationary or with both feet on the floor.
You say you find the FIBA Rule slightly unclear, but that is because it appears to contradict what you understand the Rules to allow and only because you disregard the key definitions.
In contrast, the NBA Rule appears slightly unclear, because it can be (and has been) construed to allow the “travelling Step-Through” which is the very point in contention… but this is clearly contrary to the Rule 4 Definitions and can only make sense if it is written to allow a player to “raise the pivot foot” to pass or shoot only provided they are not progressing in any direction .
Finally, your clips of Kevin Garnett doing a ‘step-through’ quite clearly illustrate his attempt to legally jump off both feet following the step-through.
The two clips you show ‘side-by-side’ are both contentious - they never agreed the right-side was legal… AB thinks they are both travel violations.
It is only the one at 4.07, that Melo legitimately jumps off two feet… that’s what you should be comparing.
Of course, referees are only human and the same situation might be perceived differently … but that is not what is being debated here… here you are debating the written Rules and there should be consensus on what the Rules allow.
By far the best breakdown!
Appreciate the effort in the response. Completely fine to disagree. I am confused on how some of the rules that define the pivot prior to the point I allude to, changes the meaning? Progressing players are allowed different applications of the rules than someone stationary. If you catch the ball with both feet on the ground, you are not allowed a gather step. If you are progressing, you are allowed a gather step. Same with if you dribble after lifting your pivot foot or if you were to shoot/pass after lifting. The rules have different applications and you cannot use prior explanations on different scenarios to be applied on every completely different scenarios. That is what you are trying to do in these scenarios. Every rule book (except FIBA) clearly allows you to shoot or pass off of your non-pivot foot as long as your pivot foot DOES NOT return to the floor PRIOR to the PASS/SHOT. I appreciate your view, but the rules are written pretty clear. I showcase the unclarity, not to contradict myself, but to show that I believe it can be more clear.
At the end of the day, this move has been confirmed by the NBA Referee Operations & Development crew, FIBA head interpreter, and those on the NCAA rules committee. Just because individuals were reffed incorrectly on the rule, does not mean it is correct. You are more than welcome to reach out to your local association and go in more depth conversation with them since online is more difficult. I still see some unclarity in your breakdown and part of it could be my misinterpretation of your written work.
@@refereeuniversity
you replied: …“…I am confused on how some of the rules that define the pivot prior to the point I allude to, changes the meaning?...”
This is fundamental to the issue at hand…
…it is fundamental best practice in writing a set of rules or regulations that you:
.1…first, outline the general permissions and/or limitations for the fundamental principle/s to be applied.
.2…detail, the relevant exceptions, concessions or enhancements the expand upon the fundamental principle/s
Sometimes a body of regulations evolve as a set of disjointed permissions and limitations, and this typically leads to contradictions and confused interpretations.
But when a set of rules is “codified” they are put into a structured order and some rules are given priority… subsidiary rules must then be read in conjunction with the general principles outlined in advance.
[*Although I’m aware there are actually conflicting cultural factors involved here, where some cultures do follow a weighted principled approach, while others inherently place more weight on the specific detailed permissions and restrictions.]
And this is where the confusion arises…
-when readers disregard the principal rules and only focus on the specific enhancement rules provided
-when readers take the specific enhancement rules out of context from the principal rules
-when the numbering of the rules is disregarded or altered and the precedence of certain principal rules re lost.
…Rule numbering can be critically important in determining which Rules take precedence!... but that is too often overlooked.
Why should your give more weight to these definitions and principal rules when you read subsequent subordinate rules?.... because the rules themselves tell you to?
Without reiterating points in my previous response:
-NBA rules - Rule 4 are the definitions and general concepts to be applied in the subsequent more detailed specific rules… and “Rule 4 Section IX - Travelling” even states the associated rules to which this fundamental definition shall apply.
-FIBA rules - Rule 25.1 outlines the definition and principle and states that it applies to the limits outlined throughout that Article 25… we’re debating interpretation of a specific enhancement in Rule 25.2.1
-NCAA rules - like the NBA rules, Rule 4 provides the definitions and general concepts, and Rule 9 details more specifically the limitations.
Now the written FIBA rules DO allow for consistent interpretation on this rule… (that, as written, you can jump off the pivot foot, but cannot step-through off the pivot foot!)… the only things inconsistent in this FIBA rule are:
-1) that the ‘official’ interpretation is inconsistent with the written rule… and
-2) that it is inconsistent with the way (as you say) NBA and NCAA referees have been advised to interpret the ambiguous contradiction in their rules, and the way you have chosen to interpret that ambiguity.
Personally, I would like to becoming more involved in basketball refereeing at a local regional level (drawing on my experience refereeing in another sport at an international level as an internationally accredited referee), but I cannot get past the dilemma of being expected to follow referee guidelines (on this and various other interpretations) that have become inconsistent with the written rules. I would prefer to referee consistent with the written rules and its stated principles, but that would make my refereeing inconsistent with the current practice. There are other significant inconsistencies, in particular where FIBA have appeared to adopt a rule from NBA or NCAA, but re-written it in a different form and making its FIBA interpretation inconsistent with the BNA or NCAA origin.
And in the context of writing and interpreting regulations, I iterate my points above drawing on: 1) my general professional experience with law consulting; and 2) my personal involvement in international referee panels reviewing and writing international refereeing interpretations and rules for another sporting discipline…. It is incredibly difficult to develop rules and interpretations that are concise and easily-readable but also unambiguous… and that is before we even try to translate them into other languages… we were once shown 5 distinct German versions of our international rules which had each been translated in good faith from the English version!
@@troylipsham4365 I can understand that your background in law may have a different way of laying out the restrictions and allowances in the court of law. Maybe the order of laws/rules are different and you are trying to convince me of a point that I will never have full understanding of since I am not a lawyer. What I do know is that if I ever felt like there was unclarity, I could bring it to those that are in the position of writing the rules for the world and gather their interpretation. If I was to try and comprehend how you process things, I would go to the NBA rule book under traveling.
It states: "A player who receives the ball while standing still may pivot, using either foot as the pivot foot." Since that is the first point in the article and the definition both do not state that I cannot have more than one pivot foot. It says I can choose. Technically, I can keep switching them. No where does it say I cannot switch them. Regardless it specifically states twice that you can lift your pivot foot as long as you shoot or pass before it touches the ground. The step through is lifting your pivot foot and shooting before it comes back down. I do not understand how there is so much confusion? We do it all the time with layups, we step off the pivot foot and finish off our non pivot foot.
The confusion should only occur under FIBA rules because it states to jump off.
@@refereeuniversity This raises several further relevant points...
1..The written rules should be clear enough in themselves... there shouldn't be much need to seek clarification from those in positions of writing.
2..The biggest issue with that is when those in charge of interpretation deviate from or disregard certain written rules, and then there is more inconsistency.
3..You have chosen to refer only to Rule10-Section XIII, and disregarding the preceding Rule 4 Sections VIII & IX which set out the principle and definition of the Pivot and Travelling.... this clearly states you may step once or more with the SAME foot, with the OTHER (PIVOT) foot in contact with the floor. It does say you can't exceed these limits... you can't switch pivot foot.
4..The allowance for lifting the pivot foot for a player in motion, is a concession on the fundamental rule to allow for continuity of movement and protect from injuries that would arise if required to make more abrupt stops upon receiving the ball... it is a special concession and is clearly separated from the fundamental limits on a player who is or stationary or comes to a stop.
5..I recall when I refereed basketball 30 years ago, this step-through was a violation... I returned to basketball in the past 5 years in a coaching role (after 30 years involved in another sport) and I noted a number of local players (particularly women) using a step-thru from a stationary catch or after several pivots following a stop - sometimes penalised but typically not... I referred back to the rules comparing it to my old rulebook from the 80s to see what allowed this 'newer interpretation'... It is clearly evident that a specific concession has been taken and applied out of context, and a whole generation of new referees have been indoctrinated with an interpretation which is inconsistent with the fundamental rule.
6..The confusing is obvious... a large group of players and coaches and referees have been coached and refereed where this 'step-through' is regarded as a violation and this is consistent with a reading of the written rules... but we have another generation who have been coached and refereed that it is allowable and this is consistent with current higher level technical interpretation (but this interpretation can only be achieved by reading certain rules in isolation and out of context of the general principles of the rules involved).
5..Again the confusion you see in the FIBA rule is only because you are trying to interpret it consistent with your interpretation (which you appear to draw primarily from the NBA rulebook and unwritten official interpretation). The FIBA rulebook is the more relevant for me (in NZ), and as you note its use of the word "jump" rather than "lift" takes away some of the arguments for a step-thru to be allowed... however some ambiguity remains and in any and all cases consistency with all the relevant written rules can only be achieved if the step-thru is only allowed for a player already in motion, and is deemed a violation for a player who is stationary or has come to a stop and pivoted on a pivot foot.
I chose to raise these points on your post because you do some excellent work sharing interpretation of the rules, and it seems futile trying to reason with the newer generation of referees... too many learn the rules mainly from word-of-mouth and have not comprehensively read the relevant rulebook, and those few who understand the inconsistency seem to avoid the issue by making it a "no-call". I perhaps hoped you might look at it objectively and shared the fact that the current 'official' interpretation creates its own contradiction in the rules.
There are 5 or 6 things that arise in a debate like this:
-what the written rules actually say (and which set of rules are we using)
-how are those written rules being interpreted (in discussion)
-are the interpretations consistent with the written rules
-how are those rules actually being applied (in practical refereeing)... which rules are being neglected or disregarded
-what is possible for the referee to actually see and judge in real-time
-what should the rules actually allow
So far I have focussed on what's written, interpreted, and the inconsistencies arising...
but for the record, I would prefer that the step-thru is a violation for a player who catches the ball stationary or has come to a stop and established a pivot - except for the concession allowed for a player already in motion, the pivot foot must not visibly been lifted from the floor while the other foot remains in contact with the floor - this can be applied consistently with each current version of the rules (NBA, FIBA, NCAA) - all that is needed is to correct the current 'official' (mis)interpretation that conflicts with the fundamental rules.
If however, they are going to continue with the current 'official' interpretation, then they should more clearly specify this exception in the rules to remove ambiguity and contradiction with the fundamental rules... it would just require a more definitive statement that "at any time a player with the ball who is stationary or pivoting may travel one step in any direction (by stepping out away from and lifting the pivot foot) in order to shoot or pass the ball, (but not to commence a dribble)".
[And that raises one final point... why the inconsistency in interpretation between a pass or shot and dribble - why do the rules and interpretations make it a violation to step (not jump) off the pivot to dribble, but not if you shoot or pass... historically these were consistent that you could not lift your pivot with the other foot still on the floor to initiate any of these things... but because rules were more specific about a 'dribble' but slightly ambiguous about passing or shooting the rule has become abused and applied and refereed inconsistently.]
Just to be sure: It doesn't matter whether you have dribbled or not before you make your step through, right? Fx Candace at 1.30 haven't dribbled before resting the ball in her hands and thereafter making the step-through move - This is legal, correct?
Correct! Apologize for the delay.
fiba rule is not as clear as other 2. its says "may jump off pivot foot" which could be interpreted as pivot foot has to be on the ground when jump is made
Ok but how do you dribble after the pivot? You catch ball, pivot , pump fake, step and dribble once, land on both feet and layup.
My question is, do you dribble after or before you take a step with your free foot or at the same time?
In dribble situations, ball has to leave hand before pivot foot is raised. Different rules for a dribble vs shooting and passing
The 3 examples (Ginobli, Kobe, TMac) are all proving KG's point that you can step thru but have to jump off BOTH feet. Candace is stepping thru, lifting her pivot foot, and jumping off 1 foot. You have yet to provide a step thru example in the NBA similar to the one Candace provided.
Gear bottom right in video and alter the playback speed. At least 2 of the players end up taking off one foot, nearing impossible to attack towards the hoop without taking off of one. I made a video of clearcut ones to help: th-cam.com/video/vCbAtpVNxjw/w-d-xo.html&ab_channel=RefereeUniversity
does that mean that you could stay on the foot that you step through with (the non pivot foot) for as long as you'd like? not sure how useful it would be just curious. also I mean if you stay on that one foot and not put your pivot back down
Yes you could do that. Completely fine
Lol
As long as the pivot foot stays established (in contact with the ground) any step taken with the other foot is considered to be the 2nd step. You can take 8 2nd steps as long as that pivot stays down. There’s no illegal 3rd step unless the pivot is raised and returned to the floor before releasing the ball. You could take 8 2nd steps then pause with your pivot foot in the air for as long as you want (before getting a 3 or 5 second violation) then jump off your 2nd foot and shoot or pass. Nothing in the rules says it has to be a fluid motion or look natural. That type of thing just isn’t practical. That’s why it’s never done.
Not a travel rules state that you can pickup your pivot foot to attemp a pass or a field goal as long as your pivot foot doesnt touch the ground before the attemp easy call
I’m so sick of people calling this a travel, gets me so angry bro
Stay angry then, because it’s definitely a travel.
What about Luka’s fade away jump shot. He always brings up his right leg first and shoot off his left, sometimes without bringing the left foot off the ground.
legal
Based on these rules and Melo's example, Melo could have NOT shot after the cross-over and just balanced himself on his right foot and not incur a traveling call just because he keeps his left foot in the air?
Jokic did it recently, changed his pace on a step through: legal.
In the rule you kept reading out so clearly you proved that it in fact is a travel. It says you have to jump off your pivot foot. Not take a step and jump off your non pivot foot. If you jump from your pivot foot on the ground it isn't a travel if you step like melo was it is a travel. You talked about taking steps to do a lay up or a floater. That is different bc you are dribbling the ball and picking it up to take 2 steps to shoot or pass. That is different than pivoting and taking two steps to pass or shoot (which isn't allowed either).
A travel is based on bringing your pivot foot back down before releasing the ball. Melo's move is not a travel. He grabs the ball with his left foot on the floor, establishing his left foot as his pivot and then he takes a legal step with his right foot and jumps off of it. He never brought is pivot foot back down before releasing the ball so it's not a travel.
The reply stated to you is correct by --
Great video ended a debate between me and my cousin lol
25.2.1 says player may jump off a pivot foot. the problem is, they're jumping off the next step after the pivot foot so technically, the other foot has already returned to the ground before the ball left his hand. Carmelo travelled.
That is a FIBA rule, which means it would not be applicable to anyone playing in the states.
Secondly, FIBA has stated that a step through is not a player jumping off their pivot foot, it's someone stepping off of it, which makes the move legal.
These shows old players skills are much better ( jump with both feets off)compare to current. Looking for easy way out.
Around 6 minutes ur explaining the rules very well. But ur aren't even mentioning the fact that stepping off of the completely other foot makes it a 3rd step making it a travel.
No, it doesn’t. While the pivot foot is established any step taken with the other foot is the 2nd step. It doesn’t matter how many 2nd steps there are. There’s not a 3rd step unless the established pivot foot is raised and returned to the floor before releasing the ball.
@@paulmayer8654 You are wrong. After dribbling, you can take two or three steps, and then take a shot or pass the ball. However, when you did not complete the final action, you stopped midway. At this time, your feet touched the ground and your hands were holding the ball. The subsequent movements have nothing to do with lay up--012. Use the pivot foot rule instead. Because both feet touch the ground, the pivot foot must be established.
@@paulmayer8654 25.2.1. Pivot foot rule, you can raise your pivot foot to shoot or pass, but before either foot touches the ground. When you lift your pivot foot, your another foot just on the ground.
@@paulmayer8654 012 just can have 012, not 012222
@@rogerhuang9760 you don't understand what the word "may" means if that's what you think. "May jump off the pivot" is very different than must jump. All that's doing is giving an example of something that's legal. Coming to a stop adds the 0 to the beginning, bu nothing after that changes with the pivot rules. 0,1,2,2,2,2 is most definitely allowed. That's still 2 official steps in the rulebook. Step 2 functions the same as if you start from a stop. If you start from a stop though, all you get is step 2. That's the difference between being able to come to a stop or starting from a stop... The extra step you get. When you start from a stop and maintain the pivot foot, the player can take step 2, 2, 2, 2 and still do anything he wants. If the pivot comes up (same as step 1 after coming to a stop) he just must release the ball (and not be the first player to touch it) before his pivot touches the ground again. Picking up the pivot is NEVER considered to be a step unless it's returned to the ground.
It's not a travel. However if you dribble didn't jump stopped then that move is dead and it is travel as soon as you choose a pivot foot what you cannot anymore after a jump stop it is a travel. But what Miss Parker did is clean. The rules states that a player May lift his pivot foot to shoot or pass the ball, but not to dribble
It's tricky on game speed and inexperienced referee might call it. Even a pump fake and jab dribble and step back is called. It's always upon the whistle. But rulebookwise it's not a travel.
That is why referees have to be more patient and view all 12 frames.