Видео

Veré qué puedo hacer

Yes, since screening requires more clips and explanation I planned on making a video on it. I did take a 1 year break and just recently came back after multiple messages about it. I will add it to the list (2 videos already made and ready to post, I have 2 more being finished slowly then I will do screening). For your scenario, the only player causing illegal contact is the defender. If the official feels that the defense attempting to get through the screen is A) enough contact to warrant a foul and B) would not want to allow that contact in case it leads to rough play or tough game management by allowing that contact, then they would probably call a foul on the defender. If we do not call a defensive foul, chances are the officials would not call a illegal screen on the reposition you mentioned because the defense caused them to do a slight reposition. It all depends on the league/level of play. I have seen screens that were deemed legal at the olympics/international level but not legal for university play in some countries. Hope that helps!

@@refereeuniversity Love your work. You break everything down into simple explanations that seem so logical, like "why couldn't a referee see that." I suppose it's a bit different under the pressure of a fast moving game, but then again they are the ones we look to for guidance on whats right or wrong in the game. Hope you are well

@@Gaze-v1r Thank you, I will do my best to stay on top of adding content :)

Great question, I haven’t found anything currently on it (maybe it will be in the new OBRI to accommodate this new text in the rules). I would imagine it would be the officials judgement to use tools at their disposal. A timeout is reserved for smaller infractions of a delay, I imagine in this case since a DQ is more severe, they would look at delay of game technicals or potential OBR 20.1 actions prevent the game from being played that could have the team forfeit.

@@refereeuniversity Bro I think I found this Rule: Article: 19 19.3.6 Substitutions shall be completed as quickly as possible. A player who has committed 5 fouls or has been disqualified must be substituted immediately (taking no more than 30 seconds). If there is a delay of the game, a time-out may be charged against the offending team. If the team has no time-out remaining, a technical foul for delaying the game may be charged against the head coach, entered as a 'B'.

@@mindaugasbalsys8301 love it! Thank you!

Sir i hav a question-Is there any 10 second rule is implemented in new version of FIBA rule? Specifically when 1,2,3 free throws are awarded to any player.

Thank you! Means a lot! We have a lot of other videos planned to create but it takes time, happy I can help!

@@refereeuniversity thank you again! I am gonna steal your method to teach my fellow officials in my country(Mauritania)

@@oumarsy3485 Thank you for sharing the video! It means a lot! Happy I can help support!

Thank you! It means a lot!!

I have had some talks with FIBA about their terminology but unfortunately, nothing transpired from it

Spotlights by Niwel, details in the videos information :)

i totally agree - i think these sort of flops are hilarious

I really Appreciate you! Rules become easier when you explain them. KUDOS!

This one is a tricky one but it’s a correct charge. Reason being is that his right foot is not in the no charge semi circle area (because it’s outside the semi circle area) and his left foot is out side in front of it. If the no charge line extended to the endline, then it would be a no call :) thanks for the support!!

You're Welcome!!

@@refereeuniversity I wonder if (when this becomes more common knowledge) every player holding the ball quickly now tries a shot when an off ball foul is called.... (like most of them do when being fouled themselves)...

@@petermuller7079 Possible, but very difficult to do since they need to be in their act of shooting prior or during the occurrence of the foul.

@@refereeuniversity Sure - but even though chances are slim, at the moment every player takes a shot when a foul on him is called.... Players do a lot of things that have only very little chances of success (throwing their heads back in contact, shouting 'and one', signalling travels, ...). We will see.

They could do a HCC. Maybe the coach used their HCC already, maybe it was very close that they did not want to use it on that play and have it saved for later? I am not sure why the coach did not, those are just some of the reasons why he might not want to.

@@refereeuniversity it was a very interesting play. I had something somewhat similar happen,where a shooter was ran down after the release. But since the shooter already ended his shot (landed/never jumped), it was score plus possession (or 2ft if it was a bonus)

What rule are you talking of? FIBA didn't do much, just some clearifying

I plan to have the new rule changes on october 1st when they are solidifed and used. I plan to be in the webinar to confirm my interpretations match what is described by FIBA prior to making the video :) Thanks for the support! For correctable errors, that might be later. I was waiting for the rule rewrite!

@@refereeuniversity huh. Didn't know there was a webinar. Pity I can't attend. I'm assuming it'll be talked about in our referees college next week

@@cptfwiffo Sometimes they are open to the public but they need to do a better job of sharing that knowledge :/

Not true

It was ok for the player to lose the ball but you see that the player lets the ball come to rest in his hand by having it under the ball then dribbles it again. (24.1.2)

You can’t do a layup without lifting your pivot foot

@@refereeuniversity A layup is different from a step through. No wonder you regard an illegal step through as legal.

@@rogerhuang9760 Executing a layup has the same movement and step allocation as a step through. There is no extra step, there is no illegal step when doing the move. I know people struggle on understanding that, that is why we give multiple different ways of explaining it to help those still struggling.

@@refereeuniversity Neither Jordan nor Kobe ever did this kind of move. If some of the illegal step-through in your film are legal, then Olajuwon should be scoring more than 50 points per game.

Correct call! With defensive fouls committed in the act of shooting, Durant just has to start his upward motion when the foul occurs for the basket to count. After the made basket, the penalty for the foul has to be administered which is a throw-in for the offensive team. Correct procedure by the officials, hope that clarifies it!

@@refereeuniversity Could you please let me know where I can find the video on teaching travels on this channel? Many travels were missed and not called during that game.

@@minnussthis is our traveling video that most organizations refer to: FIBA Rules Explained: Traveling ruclips.net/video/Se67lfUH-eg/видео.html

Nope

With defensive fouls committed in the act of shooting, Durant just has to start his upward motion when the foul occurs for the basket to count. After the made basket, the penalty for the foul has to be administered which is a throw-in for the offensive team. Correct procedure by the officials, hope that clarifies it!

When I mean shot fake, I am not referring to the shot fake itself or a layup with a shot fake. I’m referring more to a commit to a shot, and when I don’t like my look, I use the step I haven’t used yet. So I do my zero step, then step 1, I go to shoot, about to get blocked, come down use my second step that hasn’t been used and go up again. Physically very hard to do, but a rare scenario that we would call travel as it’s not in the spirit of the game

@@refereeuniversity Yes, i did understand the scenario ... but still don't see how that changes anything. For the defender it makes no difference if he is fooled by a preplanned & really elaborate fake or by a counter to his defense. ... and if that occurs on the first or the second step. So why prohibit it?

@@petermuller7079I’m sure there are rules that you disagree with in different leagues, this could be one of those cases. Like the throw off the backboard used to count as a dribble in FIBA, now it doesn’t to promote more highlight type plays. I would just see it being as something that makes it tougher to officiate if that would be allowed. It definitely makes it tougher to play defense on it, we need a balance.

@@refereeuniversity Tougher to defend: Definitely. Tougher to officiate: I doubt it. 😁 In contrary: Just counting and watching for the correct sequence of steps should be easier than to 'measure'/estimate if some of the steps are 'too high'. But in the end as always: 'Don't f*** with the referee' (a fancy move that's not against the rules but triggers the whistle in 90% of the cases doesn't help you). 🤣

@@petermuller7079as much as it may seem easier, we know how much the zero step has increased incorrect travel violations in parts of the world that use FIBA :) in my opinion, it’s probably easier to focus on the steps. The definition I helped create in the video was to accommodate the opinion of a FIBA rules interpreter at the international level (assists with rule writing).

Yes! That small change (and not travelling at the start) would make it legal. Some coaches try new things without checking with the rules that may result in this video. Looks cool to athletes where I may bring them to their training program but not a legal move. Then us referees have to clean it up on the court when they try it :)

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

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 ???

I was waiting for the Step through to be addressed. It looks like the rule doesn’t address it and not going to lie, the other rules make me lean towards thinking the correct interpretation (based on purely the language there) is that the dirk fade/sombor shuffle/ step through are illegal. It’s an illegal step to lift your pivot foot and then dribble, and that’s the same footwork as a step through. I’m still going to do it since even in Fiba they don’t call any of those moves

There are plenty of videos on my channel that may address specific moves. You may ask why it wasn’t in here, I wanted to keep it to showcasing videos in regards to only the FIBA rule book, the wording they use for travelling and keep it for basic moves. Then have a separate video showcasing if certain moves are legal according to different rules Step through here: ruclips.net/video/l-Dx-zgjszU/видео.html Different moves with 0-1-2 ruclips.net/video/bIllF8ZDhpQ/видео.html

My response would be similar to what was responded for Patrick

@@refereeuniversity just realized my question's already covered in this. the rule pivot foot can be lifted but cannot be returned to the floor before the ball is released applies to so many pivot uses

Click the wheel on the bottom right of the video, change playbackspeed of video to .25x, watch how people end up jumping off of one. Almost physically impossible to do staggered foot forward jump without one foot coming off first. However, since your only issue is not clear cut examples, I was prepared for this by creating a 6min video with NBA referees confirming the legality of it: ruclips.net/video/vCbAtpVNxjw/видео.htmlsi=s5ykUPdZfFdKNVdN

@@refereeuniversityI love how so many players call for the travel. The nba isn’t a great example of referee calls and consistency. Some players lift off the ground with a two foot jump while others don’t. The nba chooses which players they will call violations on and others they don’t. Finally, I think anyone could agree that even referees miss calls now and again.

Yes we know that some rules have been inconsistently called, but the point of that video is both the operations person and head of referee development say the rule allows for it

The point of the video was rules people argue about. All of these are in the rulebook. That's the point.

Can you show me where in the rule book where the over the back and reach in foul is? Signal and definition please

The point (reg. over the back & reaching) of this video is: There is no foul WITHOUT (relevant) CONTACT!! And that's completely valid and adresses a common misconception.

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.